Bhim Sah @ Bhim Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31720 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2025 Thana- HASANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Bhim Sah @ Bhim Kumar S/O Bhaglu Sah R/O Village- Chhotaki Rajwa, Ward no. 01, PS- Hasanpur, Distt- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shishir Kumar Shishir, Adv Mr. Binod Kumar Sinha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Hasanpur P.S. Case No. 248/2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 329(4), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109 (1), 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of BNS.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 01.12.2025, at 8:00 pm, the petitioner along with other accused, arrived armed with sticks and knives and began abusing. When the informant resisted, accused Prakash Sah attacked her head with a knife, resulting in a bloody head injury. Accused Arjun Sah and Bhim Sah attacked Priyanka's head with sticks, injuring her. When the informant's husband came to intervene, Arjun Sah attacked him with a stick, severely injuring him. In the ensuing assault, the accused snatched jewellery from the informant and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31720 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/2 other members of her family. With the assistance of local residents, the injured were admitted to Sadar Hospital.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the petitioner has not committed any offence. The FIR has been lodged after a delay of five days and there is no explanation submitted by the informant for delayed lodging of the FIR. Further, there are general and omnibus allegations against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.

6. As per the allegations levelled in the FIR, it transpires that the petitioner is the main assailant, who is said to have assaulted on the forehead which is a vital part of the body and could have led to the death of the informant-Rinku Devi. Under these circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U T