Nitish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35336 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2024 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Nitish Kumar S/o Surendra Yadav R/o Village- Sahay Bigha, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Dist.- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prithivi Raj Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and apprehending his arrest in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 237 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 310(2), 311, 109 of BNS and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per FIR, informant and his brother was looted during the occurrence who were working with R.V.M. Future Nidhi Ltd. and during the occurrence the accused persons open fire upon informant and others causing bodily injuries on chest and leg.
4. During course of argument, learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35336 of 2025(6) dt.21-01-2026 2/2 appearing on behalf of the petitioner drawn attention of this Court towards para no. 98 of the case diary where apprehended co-accused namely Vikash Kumar and Akash Kumar confessed the involvement of this petitioner alongwith other unknown co-accused persons stating that this petitioner never visited place of occurrence. However, it is submitted that said statement also disclosing the fact that the occurrence was well within the knowledge of this petitioner also. It is submitted that in view of the fact as petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence the allegation of firing not appears convincing against him.
5. Let it be so, considering the nature of accusations and further in view of statement of co-accused as discussed aforesaid, coupled with the fact that investigation is still open, the prayer of anticipatory bail of petitioner stands rejected for the present.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Sudha/- U T