Patna High Court – Orders
Mukesh Kushwaha @ Mukesh Bhagat @ Mukesh … vs The State Of Bihar on 21 May, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6265 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2020 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
Gopalganj
======================================================
Mukesh Kushwaha @ Mukesh Bhagat @ Mukesh Kumar Bhagat S/O Sri
Ganesh Bhagat Kushwaha @ Sri Ganesh Bhagat @ Ganesh Kushwaha
Resident of Village- Banjari Ward No. 11, P.O and P.S- Gopalganj, Distt.-
Gopalganj.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ansul, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Vyas Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Anshul Aaryan, Advocate
Mr. Aditya Raj Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
5 21-05-2025
Heard Mr. Ansul learned senior counsel for the
petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the Informant.
2. The petitioner makes a prayer for bail in
connection with Gopalganj Town P.S Case No. 221 of 2020
registered for offences under Sections 307, 326, 34 of Indian
Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 302
of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation in the First Information Report has
been made by the informant that his father was shot-at by the
petitioner and two accused persons Mukesh Kushwaha and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6265 of 2025(5) dt.21-05-2025
2/5
Bushan Kushwaha from a distance of five feet. It is further
alleged that when the father of the informant fell down co-
accused Bhushan Kushwaha fired at the back of the deceased
and all the three accused persons fled away on their
motorcycle. The later part of the First Information report has
specifically disclosed that the firing made by petitioner
Mukesh Kushwaha hit the deceased on his chin and the said
bullet was removed at the Primary Health Centre during the
course of treatment.
4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that from a bare perusal of the First
Information Report itself, it would be clear that the gun shot
which has been attributed to the petitioner has hit the chin of
the deceased on account of which he was treated at the
Primary Health Centre. The subsequent allegation of firing at
the back of the deceased is specific on Bhushan Kushwaha
and the learned senior counsel has invited the attention of the
Court to the post mortem report which would show that the
external injury only relates to a stitched wound on the lower
back which is an inch away from the vertibral column. And
the death in the opinion of the doctor was due to septicemia
as a result of the said injury. On the strength of the post
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6265 of 2025(5) dt.21-05-2025
3/5
mortem report, the learned senior counsel has submitted that it
does not refer to any injury being caused at the chin much less
the same being the cause of death of the deceased. It has also
been submitted that there is a long drawn civil dispute
between the parties and the same has been referred to in the
petition filed on behalf of the petitioner and it is due to such
property dispute that the petitioner has also been made an
accused in the present case. Further, the petitioner is in
custody since 17.01.2024 and after the charges having been
framed it is submitted that no further progress in the trial has
been made.
5. The learned APP for the State and the counsel for
the informant however, opposes the grant of bail and they
point out that the injury report of the deceased would show
that the deceased had received a lacerated wound over the
chin of size 2*1/2 in the oral cavity along with another injury
on the back which has been attributed to a different person.
However, it has been pointed out that both the injuries have
been caused by fire arm and they are both grievous in nature.
It has also been submitted that the petitioner has a long list of
criminal antecedent, however, the learned senior counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that there are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6265 of 2025(5) dt.21-05-2025
4/5
only five cases pending against the petitioner mostly in which
the petitioner is on bail and there are few other cases lodged
upon him which have resulted in an acquittal and a detail of
the same has been given in paragraph 18 of the said petition.
6. It is to be taken into consideration that the
petitioner has remained in custody since 17.01.2024 with no
progress in the trial after framing of charge and the main
allegation of firing at the back which, according to the
postmortem report, is the cause of death, is not attributed to
the petitioner and further, the postmortem report does not
mention any injury upon the chin.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, let the petitioner is enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount, each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Sessions Judge-XV, Gopalganj in connection with
Gopalganj Town P.S Case No. 221 of 2020 subject to the
condition that:-
(i) The criminal antecedent of the petitioner shall be
verified expeditiously without causing any delay in the
process.
(ii) The petitioner would physically be present on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6265 of 2025(5) dt.21-05-2025
5/5all the dates during the trial and his absence on two
consecutive dates would give a liberty to the learned Court
below to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(iii) One of the bailors shall be a family member or
a close relative of the petitioner.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Raj Ranjan/-
U
[ad_1]
Source link