Deepu Kumar @ Dipu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27565 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-903 Year-2025 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Deepu Kumar @ Dipu Kumar S/O Ram Prasad @ Pujari Yadav R/O Vill.- Vanshraj Bigha, P.S.- Tehta, Dist.- Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 29-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. Case no. 903 of 2025 registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. As per the prosecution case, informant states that the 12 named accused persons including the petitioner herein started to abuse the informant. On protest he was assaulted which led to the breaking of his teeth. He fell unconscious. It is further stated that on regaining consciousness and on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27565 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026 2/3 informant going along with his family members to the house of Chintu Kumar, Jeetu Kumar opened fire as a result of which the informant sustained gunshot injury on his hand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the contents of the FIR itself, it would transpire that though the occurrence is in two parts, in the first part the allegation against the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature and in the second part at the house of Chintu Kumar, the allegation of opening fire is on co-accused Jeetu Kumar alone. The petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case and he undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner being general and omnibus in nature and the allegation of firing being on co-accused Jeetu Kumar and not the petitioner herein, it is directed that the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. Case no. 903 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27565 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026 3/3 two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Jehanabad. (Partha Sarthy, J) sauravkrsinha/- U T