Kanhaiya Sah @ Krishna Kumar Sah v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40019 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2026 Thana- LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Kanhaiya Sah @ Krishna Kumar Sah S/O Late Mahavir Sah @ Late Mahavir Prasad Sah R/O Village- Alinagar, ward no-1 , P.S- LNMU, DistrictDarbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2026 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with LNMU PS Case No. 39 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the informant alleges that on 8-2-2026 at 11:15 am, he had gone to the tea shop of Mithu and asked him not to sell Gutka, narcotic etc, on which Mithu assaulted him by knife causing injury on cheek and petitioner assaulted by rod causing injury on head and Ravindar took out Rs. 200/- from his pocket and when villagers gathered, accused fled. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40019 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 2/2 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that though petitioner is alleged to have assaulted the informant by rod causing injury on head, but then there is no injury suffered by the informant on head which belies the allegation of assault. It is further submitted that as far as allegation of stabbing the informant is alleged, the same is against Mithu. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases and his presence at the place of occurrence emboldened Mithu to commit the occurrence of stabbing causing injury to the informant on his cheek, which is vital part of the body. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond or try to tamper with the evidence.

6.

Considering the submission made by learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T