Purushottam @ Purushottam Kumar @ Purushottam Paswan @ Sonu Paswan @ Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27782 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2026 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar ====================================================== Purushottam @ Purushottam Kumar @ Purushottam Paswan @ Sonu Paswan @ Sonu Kumar S/O Amar Singh Paswan @ Amar Jha @ Amar Paswan R/O Vill.- Manihari Ghat Road, P.S.- Manihari, Dist.- Katihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-05-2026 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), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 119(2), 308(5), 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.02.2026 at about 2 PM, informant was called near Kosi bridge by all the named accused persons, including this petitioner and when he went there to see the land, he was assaulted by the accused persons on the point of pistol. It is further alleged that the informant was taken from Kosi bridge to Kamat where he was again brutally assaulted by all the accused persons and they also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27782 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026 2/2 took his signature on four blank papers.

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 with ulterior motive.

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 other named accused persons, brutally assaulted the informant and forcibly got his signatures on blank papers. Petitioner has got one criminal antecedent.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence and criminal antecedent of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T