Dhananjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28092 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2024 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Dhananjay Kumar S/o Kameshwar singh R/o Village- Kayampur, P.S.- Khushrupur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deepak Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases, but then two cases were instituted by the informant herein on account of dispute relating to land and the informant alleges that on account of dispute relating to land, the occurrence took place in which the accused persons came armed with arms and petitioner along with Surajmani and Ranjeet were carrying pistol while Jamuna and Kameshwar were carrying iron rod and they stopped the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28092 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 2/3 construction work on the land, on protest accused persons fired accordingly police was informed and five empty cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that on account of dispute relating to land, the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is further submitted that no doubt allegation is of firing, but then no one was injured.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that in the event if the privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond as he has antecedent of three cases, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that Kameshwar Singh had also approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail and the same was granted by an order dated 30.04.2025 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 22415 of 2025 passed by a learned Coordinate Bench.

6. The learned APP rebuts the said submission and submits that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that Kameshwar Singh is not alleged to have been carrying gun nor there is any allegation that Kameshwar Singh assaulted the informant but then there is specific

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28092 of 2025(2) dt.07-05-2025 3/3 allegation of firing and five cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence.

7. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State and also taking into consideration the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T