Anjar Alam @ Anjr v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8184 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2025 Thana- PAHARKATTA District- Kishanganj ====================================================== 1.
Anjar Alam @ Anjr S/o Sohrab Alam R/o Village - Khajurbari, Ward no. 01, P.S - Paharkatta, District - Kishanganj 2.
Sohrab Alam S/o Bahruddin R/o Village - Khajurbari, Ward no. 01, P.S - Paharkatta, District - Kishanganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP For the Informant :
Ms. Rachna Rani, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Paharkatta P.S. Case No. 117 of 2025 dated 28.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 115(2), 126(2), 109(1), 74, 352, 351(2), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the informant, on 28.09.2025 at about 09:00 A.M., he had gone to plough the land in respect of which the dispute had been settled after panchayati. When he was ploughing the field, all the accused persons, including the petitioners, came there and started assaulting him, due to which he sustained injuries on his cheek, chest and head. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8184 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 2/3 alleged that when the informant's brother Sajid Alam arrived, then accused persons namely Sohrab (petitioner No. 2), Anjar (petitioner No. 1), Manglu and Mosana caught hold of his legs and ruptured his hydrocele with knife. It is further alleged that when the informant's other brother Sahwaz and his sister, Sahjadi Begum, came to save them, then the accused persons also assaulted both of them and tore the clothes of Sahjadi Begum.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that against the petitioners, there is no specific allegation and the allegation as to inflicting knife injuries upon the informant's brother, Sajid Alam, is against co-accused Manglu and Muzammil and there is case and counter case in between both the parties and all the injured persons, except the injured Sajid Alam, sustained simple injuries and the grievous injury to Sajid Alam is specifically attributed to the co-accused persons, not to the petitioners.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioners and submits that both the petitioners played a specific role in assaulting Sajid Alam, on whose private part the injuries were inflicted by using knife and in this regard, the FIR itself is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8184 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 3/3 sufficient and further, the injury on the private part of Sajid Alam corroborates the said allegation.
6. Considering the seriousness of the allegations appearing against the petitioners, mainly their specific role in the commission of the alleged occurrence in inflicting knife injuries upon Sajid Alam, as appears from the FIR, and also taking note of the fact that the case is under investigation, in my opinion, it is not a fit case to grant the relief of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, their prayer stands rejected. (Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U T