Sunil Kumar Kejriwal @ Sunil Kejriwal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22714 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2024 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Kejriwal @ Sunil Kejriwal Son of Late Hari Kejriwal @ Hari Prasad Kejriwal Resident of Village - Bhagwanpur Chakashekhu, Ward No.- 6, Dalsinghsarai, P.S.- Dalsinghsarai, District - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP For the informant :
Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Piyush Kumar Pandey for the informant as also the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dalsinghsarai P.S. Case No. 368 of 2024 for the offence registered under sections 103/3(5) of BNS & Section 27 of Arms Act lodged on 26.11.2024 by the informant, Rajkumar Ray.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that in the night, when his brother, Ashok Rai along with his nephew, Roushan were moving towards Dalsinghsarai, near bypass, on the order of this petitioner, the allegation is that Ajit Jha, Ankur Kejriwal and Amit Soni opened fire causing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22714 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 immediate death of his brother, he being an eye-witness, lodged the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as his son, Ankur Kejriwal is concerned, final form has been submitted by the Police which shows that the exaggerated FIR has been lodged. The fact remains that the informant and the deceased were having serious dispute and for proper investigation, a petition was also preferred before this Court. At best, he has been assigned the role of order giver and the main assailant role has been attributed to Ajit Jha and Amit Soni.
5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand submits that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents, only one criminal antecedent was brought on record in the present petition and later, as an afterthought, the supplementary affidavit was filed bringing on record the two other criminal antecedents. Further, he is a land grabber and considering his repeated role in implicating the people, a Special Investigation Team was also constituted by the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur. The CDR location of Ajit Jha and Pramod Rai have been established and in that background, so far as anticipatory bail is concerned, he is not entitled to it.
6. Having gone through the facts of the case and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22714 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3 submissions of the parties beside the different paragraphs of the case diary, it is a case of killing of the brother of the informant, he claims to be an eye-witness, role has been assigned. So far as the petitioner is concerned, though he is an order giver, the fact remains that he has three criminal antecedents under his belt.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts, this Court is not inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail which is accordingly rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T