Anish Kumar @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38682 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- NOKHA District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Anish Kumar @ Manish Kumar S/o Raju Nandan Singh Resident of VillageSisirta, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas. 2.

Amit Kumar @ Avinash Kumar Son of Narayan Singh Resident of VillageSisirta, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas. 3.

Vinod Kumar Son of Kameshwar Singh Resident of Village- Sisirta, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas.

4.

Abhishek Kumar Son of Narayan Singh Resident of Village- Sisirta, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas.

5.

Akash Kumar @ Guddu Son of Late Prabhunath Singh @ Prabhu Singh Resident of Village- Sisirta, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas. 6.

Dhiraj Kumar @ Dinesh Kumar Son of Ram Vilas Singh @ Ram Belash Singh Resident of Village- Sisirta, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Siddharth Harsh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Nokha P.S. Case No. 27 of 2026 instituted under Sections 191(2), 190, 223, 280, 292, 296, 132 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per the prosecution case, petitioners along with other accused are alleged of causing damage to the vehicle of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38682 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/2 the police.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner no. 1 has two criminal antecedents, petitioner no. 2 has two criminal antecedents and petitioner no. 4 has one criminal antecedent. Petitioner nos. 3, 5 and 6 have got clean antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the allegation that the petitioners attempted to assault the police personnel when asked to desist from their activities, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

8. The petitioners are directed to surrender and pray for regular bail in the court below.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T