Mintu Singh @ Mintu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15006 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-478 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Mintu Singh @ Mintu Kumar Singh S/o- Devnandan Singh @ Deonandan Singh @ Nepali Singh Village- Sadanandpur PS-Ballia District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-07-2026 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 126(2), 115(2), 352, 351(2), 103(1), 329(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..

3. As per prosecution case, on 05.11.2025 at about 2 PM, informant, along with his brother, namely Rahul Kunwar, was feeding fodder to the cattle, in the meantime, four persons riding on two motorcycles came there and out of them, three persons threw informant's another brother, namely Shambhu Kunwar, from the motorcycle, threatened the informant and fled away. On query, Shambhu Kunwar disclosed that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, assaulted him

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15006 of 2026(5) dt.14-07-2026 2/2 with butt of pistol and iron rod. Thereafter, Shambhu Kunwar was taken to hospital and during course of treatment, he died.

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 and petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case merely on suspicion. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that name of petitioner has been disclosed by the deceased himself and there is specific accusation that he, along with other F.I.R. named accused persons, assaulted him with butt of pistol and iron rod and humiliated him as a result of which, he died during course of treatment.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T