Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15583 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-341 Year-2024 Thana- RIGA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar Son of Devendra Ray Resident of Village - Sirauli, P.S. - Riga, District - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Riga P.S. Case No. 341 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the allegation, on 07.10.2024 at about 8:40 P.M., when the brother of the informant (Sunil Rai) was returning home, all the six co-accused persons along with this petitioner assaulted the informant's brother. Further, the petitioner inflicted knife blows on the stomach of the informant's brother.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15583 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/2 that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. There is allegation of inflicting repeated knife blows on the stomach of the informant's brother but the injured has suffered lacerated wound in his chest.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Shailendra Kumar for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner has inflicted knife blows on the person of the informant's brother who has suffered the grievous injuries as per Medical Report.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail, which is accordingly rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Neha/- U T