Rajnish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3249 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2025 Thana- DERNI BAZAR District- Saran ====================================================== Rajnish Kumar S/o- Vinod Ray R/v- Jaminpur Ps- Derni Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate Ms. Shambhawi, Advocate For the State :
Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, informant suspects that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, along with some unknown persons, killed his son.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.. Name of petitioner transpired in this case during investigation, merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Akash Kumar.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3249 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026 2/2 Save and except confessional statement, there is no material on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in the alleged offence.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that name of petitioner transpired in this case during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Akash Kumar wherein he has confessed that this petitioner was one of the attackers and he inflicted knife upon the deceased. Petitioner has got one criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, materials that have surfaced during investigation, gravity of offence and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T