Patna High CourtCR. MISC./13768/2026bail rejected

Arjun Sah @ Arjun Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-25Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13768 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-204 Year-2023 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Arjun Sah @ Arjun Ram Son of Subhash Sah @ Suresh Sah Resident of Village - Kritpura, P.S.- Baikunthpur, District - Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 204 of 2023, instituted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Prosecution case in brief is that petitioner along with other co-accused committed murder of brother of the informant by hanging with iron pipe in the house.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is the co-villager of the informant and there is no motive to kill the deceased. It is further submitted that at the time of occurrence, petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence. The dead

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13768 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 2/2 body of the brother of informant was recovered from the house of co-accused Satyadev Ram. There is no eye-witness of the occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T