Patna High Court
CHANDESHWAR SAH @ CHANDRASHEKHAR SAHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court denied bail, holding that the circumstances did not warrant its grant.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandeshwar Sah, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging he was the assailant who shot the deceased. He has been in custody since March 6, 2026. The prosecution’s case indicated that the petitioner was the shooter. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, especially the charge under the Arms Act, and found no sufficient ground to grant bail. Consequently, the court declined to grant bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of shooting the deceased under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- Arms Act
- shooting
- criminal procedure
- denial of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42205 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2026 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
CHANDESHWAR SAH @ CHANDRASHEKHAR SAH S/O
RAMTALESHWAR SAH @ RAMTALEWAR SAH R/o vill - Paranti, P.S.-
Bochahan, Distt.- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandra Shekhar Anand
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 29-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Bochahan P.S. Case No. 62 of 2026 registered for the offence
under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS and under Section 27 of
the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is
accused of shooting the deceased.
4. The petitioner is in custody since 6.3.2026 and
from reading of the FIR, it appears that the petitioner is the
assailant of the deceased.
5. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined
to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.