Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ashok KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The application for quashing the order is dismissed as there is sufficient material to proceed against the petitioner.

Summary

Ashok Kumar filed a discharge petition under Section 250 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, claiming he was falsely implicated in a violent incident stemming from a land dispute. The incident involved a group of armed men firing indiscriminately, injuring the informant and his wife, and the petitioner was among those charge‑sheeted. The State argued that the offences fell under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 354, 324, 307, 504 and Section 27 of the Arms Act, and that there was sufficient material linking the petitioner to the unlawful assembly. The petitioner contended there were no independent witnesses or material evidence against him. The High Court examined the record, found the case serious with gunshot injuries, and concluded that enough evidence existed to proceed against the petitioner, dismissing the application for quashing the order.

Issues considered

  • Whether the discharge petition under Section 250 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, should be granted in view of the evidence.
  • Whether there is sufficient material to sustain the charge‑sheet against the petitioner as a member of the unlawful assembly.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • discharge petition
  • false implication
  • unlawful assembly
  • firearms
  • IPC
  • Arms Act
  • land dispute
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70610 of 2025
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2020 Thana- Arwal District- Arwal
                 ======================================================
                 Ashok Kumar S/o- Kedar Singh Resident of Noniya Bigha PO- Fakharpur PS
                 and District- Arwal
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner
                                                Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner     :          Mr. Ranjeet Choubey, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party :          Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                        CAV ORDER

3   08-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. This application has been filed for quashing of the

                   impugned order dated 27.08.2025 passed by the learned District

                   and Additional Sessions Judge-1st, Arwal, in S.T. No. 314 of

                   2024, arising out of Arwal P.S. Case No.95 of 2020, whereby

                   the discharge petition filed by the petitioner under Section 250

                   of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been

                   rejected and the prayer for discharging the petitioner from the

                   case has been rejected.

                               3. As per the prosecution case, the wife of the younger

                   brother of the informant was being behaved indecently by one

                   Nityanand for last three days and, on 09.03.2020, at about 03:30

                   PM, while the wife of the younger brother of the informant was

                   passing through the door of accused Nityanand carrying grass
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70610 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
                                            2/4




          she was        again misbehaved. Accused             persons,   namely,

          Nityanand, Mithilesh Singh, Nawal Kumar, Manoj Kumar,

          Santosh Kumar, Bajrangi Kumar, Bittu Kumar, Ashok Kumar,

          Sudli and Lakshman Singh, all in drunken state armed variously

          with fire-arms came to the house of informant and started

          abusing and opened indiscriminate firing. It is alleged that

          accused Nawal Kumar armed with rifle fired on the wife of the

          informant injuring her. When the informant came to the rescue

          of his wife, then Nityanand fired upon the informant due to

          which the informant sustained injuries. Upon hearing the sound

          of firing, when nearby villager assembled, the accused persons

          fled away. Both the injured, the informant and his wife, were

          taken to Sadar Hospital and were referred to Patna for better

          treatment.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

          that the petitioner has filed an application for discharging him

          from the case as the petitioner has been falsely implicated due to

          land dispute, which relates to about 98 decimals of land. There

          is no independent witness in the present case and there are no

          material evidence against this petitioner to constitute any

          offence as alleged in the FIR and perusal of entire FIR as well as

          the case diary would show that the allegation against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70610 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
                                            3/4




          petitioner is of standing near the place of occurrence.

                       5. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer of the petitioner and has submitted that the

          offence alleged in this case are offences with respect to

          commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 354, 324,

          307 and 504 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. It is a

          case in which the informant and his wife have been injured by

          firearm. The petitioner was assaulted armed with fire-arm and

          there is allegation of indiscriminate firing against the petitioner

          along with other co-accused persons of the case. The petitioner

          was charge-sheeted, allegation against him was found to be true

          during investigation and it is not a case that he was a bystander,

          rather he participated in the occurrence having been a member

          of the unlawful assembly and there are sufficient grounds for

          proceeding against the petitioner and enough material to frame

          charges against him.

                       6. Having considered the submissions of the parties

          and perused the record, this Court finds the case to be a serious

          one, wherein two persons have received gunshot injuries. The

          petitioner was charge-sheeted and there are enough and

          sufficient materials to proceed against the petitioner and thereby

          any interference with the impugned order is not warranted.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70610 of 2025(3) dt.08-04-2026
                                                         4/4




                                    7. This application is devoid of merit and is

                       accordingly dismissed.



                                                  (Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                24.03.2026.
Uploading Date          08.04.2026.
Transmission Date       08.04.2026.


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.