Sandeep Kumar @ Prince Kumar @ Princi Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9474 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2024 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== Sandeep Kumar @ Prince Kumar @ Princi Kumar S/o- Surendra Sharma R/o - Jal Mandir, Gonawan, P.S - Nawada, District - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amresh Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-04-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Nawada P. S. Case No.162 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that unknown accused fired causing firearm injury near his left ear.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that FIR is against unknown and during the course of investigation one Aman was arrested who confessed his participation in the occurrence of firing at the informant and also disclosed that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9474 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026 2/3 contract to commit the occurrence was given by the petitioner who is own brother of the informant. It is also submitted that during course of investigation, it transpired that petitioner from mobile no.8936871315 had talked to Aman on his mobile no.9693105088 and the said mobile registered in the name of Anuj. It is further submitted that it does not appear probable that petitioner being own brother of the informant would have got the occurrence committed. It is next submitted that petitioner and the informant are having dispute relating to property. It is further submitted that even injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple in nature.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that from perusal of the injury report it would manifest that though injury has been opined to be simple but then it is firearm injury and the name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of Aman who in his statement accepted his participation in the occurrence thus the statement is inculpatory and also disclosed that it was at the behest of this petitioner that the occurrence was committed and druing course of investigation, it transpired that petitioner was in touch with Aman. It is also submitted that investigation in the case is continuing.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9474 of 2026(3) dt.27-04-2026 3/3

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T