Abhishek Ranjan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6647 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- KARPI District- Arwal ====================================================== Abhishek Ranjan S/o Late Santlal Singh @ Santlal Yadav R/O Vill.- Karwa Hankar, P.S- Karpi, Dist.- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mukul Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anil Kumar, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Karpi P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 109, 115(2), 117(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the allegation made in the F.I.R., the petitioner, along with other accused persons, is alleged to have assaulted one Sudama Kumar for not extending support to the petitioner during the election process.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to political rivalry.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6647 of 2026(3) dt.12-05-2026 2/3 Although the petitioner has eleven criminal antecedents, the same cannot be a ground for rejection of bail. No cogent material has been collected in course of investigation to connect the petitioner with the alleged occurrence which took place on 11.11.2025 and, therefore, the case of the petitioner deserves consideration on merits on the basis of the allegation made in the F.I.R. On these grounds, the petitioner deserves to be released on pre-arrest bail.

5. Per contra, learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submitted that the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged offence cannot be ruled out. The motive behind the occurrence is also well established on account of political rivalry and the materials collected in course of investigation reveal that the petitioner had actively participated in obstructing the election process and assaulting the polling agent, namely Sudama Kumar, causing injuries to him, whereupon the police force immediately intervened at the place of occurrence. Learned A.P.P. submitted that the petitioner has not only interfered with the democratic rights of the people but also tried to influence the polling agent to act according to his wishes and desire. On these grounds, He submitted that the petitioner don't deserve to be released on pre-arrest bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6647 of 2026(3) dt.12-05-2026 3/3

6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the law laid down by the Apex Court that mere involvement in several criminal cases cannot be a sufficient ground for rejection of bail, which is required to be considered on the basis of the allegations made in the F.I.R. and the materials collected during investigation.

7. In the present case, this Court finds that the petitioner had actively participated in obstructing the election process and had also tried to influence the polling agents by assaulting them, thereby interfering with the democratic process and undermining the democratic framework of the country. Considering the nature and gravity of the allegations, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on pre-arrest bail.

8. The petitioner may surrender before the learned District Court and seek regular bail.

9. The bail application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) mantreshwar/- U T