Anuraj Kumar @ Gaurav Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39786 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-46 Year-2025 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura ====================================================== Anuraj Kumar @ Gaurav Yadav, S/O Chandarhas Yadav @ Chandras Yadav R/O Village- Ganeshpur, ward no. 13, Police station- Puraini, DistrictMadhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Avinash Raj, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-09-2025 Heard Mr. Avinash Raj, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Puraini P.S. Case No. 46 of 2025 dated 14.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 140(1), 126(2), 115(2), 109 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per the prosecution story, on 14.03.2025 while the informant alongwith his brother had gone to a shop, the accused persons including the petitioner placed them into a vehicle at gunpoint. Subsequently, the petitioner and the co-accused persons assaulted the informant and his brother with an iron rod and butt portion of a gun.

4. The main submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel are that the petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, though as per the allegation, informant and his cousin brother were

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39786 of 2025(4) dt.03-09-2025 2/2 abducted by the accused persons including the petitioner but no reason was shown for which the abduction was committed and as per the allegation, both the victims were badly assaulted by the accused with an iron rod and butt portion of the gun but no corresponding injury was found on the bodies either of the injured persons and on the person of injured, Prakash Kumar, only two injuries being in the nature of abrasion and bruise were found.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Heard both the sides and perused the FIR and case diary of this case. Though, petitioner bears no criminal antecedent but considering his active participation in the abduction of the victims alongwith the co-accused persons, who have a long criminal history and also taking note of the fact that the investigation is still pending in respect of some accused persons this Court is not inclined to grant the anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioner stands rejected. (Shailendra Singh, J) maynaz/- U T