Patna High CourtCR. MISC./3112/2026dismissed

Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tuntun v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-01Mr. Justice Sunil Dutta Mishra3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3595 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2025 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Shashi Kumar Singh S/o- Arun Kumar Singh R/v- Lagma Ps- Sighiya DistSamastipur 2.

Harsh Kumar Singh @ Harsh Kumar, S/o- Sanjay Kumar Singh R/v- Lagma Ps- Sighiya Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 3112 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2025 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tuntun Son of Lakhindra Prasad Singh Resident Of Village- Flat no. 150, AIIMS, CGHS Charak Sadan Apartment, P.S.- Vikaspuri, West Delhi, Delhi At Present Residing at Village- Lagma, PsSinghia, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 3595 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP Mr. Shekhar Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rupesh Kumar Singh, Advocate (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 3112 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, APP Mr. Shekhar Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Rupesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3595 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 with Singhiya P.S. Case No. 186 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 118(1), 191(2), 109, 303(2), 351(2) and 352 of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, on the date of occurrence petitioners along with F.I.R. named accused persons and 6 to 7 unknown persons due to election dispute came with iron rod, knife, sword and katta and surrounded the informant when he had gone to see cultural programme. It is alleged that Dharmendra Kumar Singh @ Tuntun Singh ordered to kill the informant. Shashi Kumar Singh and Ashutosh Kumar Singh put a leather belt around his neck and pressed. Dharmendra Kumar Singh gave sword blow on the head of informant to kill him. Harsh Kumar and Rishi Kumar pierced knife in his back and broken the same in his back.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity and election dispute. Except the statement of victim there is no material against the petitioners. Independent witnesses have not fully supported the prosecution version. The allegation levelled against the petitioners do not tally with the medical injury report. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent. They undertake to co-operate in the investigation

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3595 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 3/3 and trial.

5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submit that there is direct allegation against the petitioners causing assault on the victim/ informant.

6. It appears from the injury report of injured/informant Manish Kumar that he sustained several injuries on his body including incised and stab injury. Except injury no. 1, nature of other injuries are opined as grievous. It is also noted that broken part of sharp instrument handed over to Police (I.O.).

7. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case and submissions made on behalf of the parties, nature of allegation against the petitioners corroborated by injury report, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected.

(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) rakhi/- U T