CR. MISC./46821/2026 of Sonu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 21 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

21-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application for anticipatory bail arises out of Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 145 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 118(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and 27 of Arms Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the informant, namely, Nandelal Paswan, alleged that on 19.06.2025, at about 07:30 P.M., he was proceeding towards his house along with his uncle. It is alleged that, owing to previous enmity, the petitioners, along with the other co-accused persons, were standing in the middle of the road with their motorcycle. When the informant and his uncle reached the said place, co- accused, Akash Kumar allegedly fired a shot at the informant's

uncle, which hit him in the abdomen, as a result of which he fell down. It has further been alleged that, apprehending danger to his own life, the informant started running towards Karhanibad village. While fleeing from the place of occurrence, he allegedly heard three more sounds of firing. Thereafter, he raised the alarm, pursuant to which the villagers reached the place of occurrence and found his uncle lying on the ground in an injured condition and covered in blood. On seeing the villagers, the accused persons allegedly fled from the place of occurrence, leaving behind their motorcycle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and as per the F.I.R., there were only three persons who were identified as co-accused Birendra Kumar and Akash Kumar while the third was an unknown person, and it has been specifically alleged that co- accused Akash Kumar fired at the uncle of the informant injuring him. It has further been submitted that previously also a case was also lodged by the family members of the informant and the name of the petitioner surfaced belatedly. It has further been submitted that the injured uncle of the informant belatedly, after three months of the occurrence, named eight persons including this petitioner, when as per the F.I.R., three persons

were present at the place of occurrence. It has further been submitted that it was only co-accused Akash Kumar, who was holding pistol and fired upon the uncle of the informant, while none of two co-accused persons were armed. It has further been submitted that neither the motorcycle nor the slippers recovered from the place of occurrence was of the petitioner and the petitioner was known to informant and his family members from before and had the petitioner allegedly taken part in the said occurrence, the name of the petitioner would have surfaced in the F.I.R. itself. It has further been submitted that the injured person also did not state the name of the petitioner to the informant at the time of registration of F.I.R. It has lastly been submitted that although the petitioner has been made accused in one another case, but the said case was lodged by the informant’s side.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Heard the parties and perused the record. Considering the nature of material against the petitioner, let the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest/surrender within six weeks from today in the Court below, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)

with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-IV, Gayaji, in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 145 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Abdus/- (Praveen Kumar, J) U T