Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2500/2026bail rejected

Saurabh Kumar Rajpoot v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-28Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2500 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-637 Year-2025 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== Saurabh Kumar Rajpoot S/o Ramjeevan Prasad Singh R/o Village - Rajpur, P.S - Amarpur, District - Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 132(2), 121(1), 121(2), 324(4), 329(3), 351(2), 352 of B.N.S., 2023.

3. The prosecution story as per the F.I.R. is hat the informant was posted as Vanrakshak in Jethour Van Sansadhan Kendra. On 11.09.2025 at about 15:00, three persons tried to entered in Van Sansadhan Kendra. When the informant tried to stop then the accused persons started abusing and assaulting him. When the informant tried to record the said incident in his mobile phone, the accused persons tried to snatched his mobile, resulting which his mobile got broken. After 30 minutes approx, 15-20 persons came at Van sansadhan Kendra holding lathi danda in their hands. They started assaulting the informant. One of the accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2500 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 2/2 Saurabh Kumar, petitioner, assaulted the informant with intent to kill with iron rod, resulting which the informant got injured. The informant's colleagues namely, Md. Abdul, Saurabh Rana and Rajeev also got severely injured. Hence the present case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due the village politics. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as statement made in para 3 of the bail application.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner is of assault to forest official who were performing official duty.

6. Considering the fact that the specific allegation against the petitioner is that he has assaulted forest officials who were performing the official duty, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of this petitioner is rejected.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) sanjeev/- U T