Jitesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27385 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2025 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna ====================================================== Jitesh Kumar S/o Opendra Singh @ Upendra Kumar R/o vill - Karai Parsurai, P.S.- Karai Parsurai, Distt.- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-05-2026 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, as per written report of the informant, namely Sanju Devi, is that on 05.06.2025 at about 5:30 PM, when her husband was standing on the road, in the meantime, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, armed with deadly weapons, started abusing him. It is further alleged that on the direction of co-accused Lakhan Singh, this petitioner and co-accused Rahul Kumar fired upon husband of informant due to which he died on the spot.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27385 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026 2/2

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to pre-existing land dispute between the parties. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific accusation that he, along with co-accused Rahul Kumar, fired upon husband of informant due to which he died on the spot.

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

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