Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Gautam Singh @ Rahul SinghversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The Court denied the petitioner's application for regular bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Gautam Singh, sought regular bail in a case involving charges of murder, attempt to murder, causing grievous hurt, criminal intimidation, conspiracy, and illegal possession of arms. The prosecution alleged that Singh, along with co‑accused, fired upon the informant's wife, causing her death, and that the petitioner fired the fatal shot. The petitioner argued that his earlier bail application was rejected, he has been in custody since October 2023, and he is willing to comply with any conditions. The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner is the principal assailant and that the trial is underway with witnesses ready to be produced. After hearing both sides, the Court, noting the seriousness of the allegations and the petitioner’s alleged role in the homicide, declined to grant bail and ordered the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case involving murder and related offences under the IPC and Arms Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • IPC
  • Arms Act
  • regular bail
  • high court
  • trial expeditious

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82145 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2023 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Gautam Singh @ Rahul Singh Son of Luro Singh Resident of Village - Karna,
                 P.S.- Parbatta, District - Khagaria.
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
                                                  Mr. Braj Bhusan Poddar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
                 For the Informant        :       Mr. Santosh Kr. Singh, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

7   18-03-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of

                   regular bail in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case no.86 of 2023

                   registered under sections 302, 323, 325, 341, 120B and 34 of the

                   Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that the accused persons named in the FIR including the

                   petitioner herein came variously armed with country made

                   pistol, lathi, danda etc. On the orders of Sita Devi, it is stated

                   that Luro Singh fired hitting the informant’s wife in her face.

                   The second shot was fired by this petitioner which hit the

                   informant’s wife in her chest and she died on the spot. On hulla

                   being raised, the accused persons escaped.

                                 4. Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82145 of 2025(7) dt.18-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                     submits that the earlier application for bail of the petitioner was

                     rejected vide order dated 15.4.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. no.2862 of

                     2025. The petitioner is in custody since 31.10.2023 and charge

                     has been framed in the learned trial Court on 11.3.2026. The

                     petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial and to abide by

                     any conditions which may be laid by this Court for his release

                     on bail.

                                  5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for

                     the State and learned counsel for the informant. It is submitted

                     by learned counsel for the informant that the petitioner is the

                     assailant of the deceased. Charge has been framed in the learned

                     trial Court and the prosecution is ready to produce the witnesses

                     on day to day basis.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner of

                     having fired upon the wife of the informant causing firearm

                     injury in her chest leading to her death, the Court is not inclined

                     to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

                                  7. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.


                                                 (Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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