Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39051 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2025 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Prasad S/O Uday Bhan Prasad R/O VillageHussainganj bazar, P.S.- Hussainganj, District -Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar No.3, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Hussainganj P.S. Case No. 397/ 2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 115(2), 126(2), 76 and 303(2) of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution story, on 16.10.2025 at about 3:00 A.M., while the informant was proceeding to her newly constructed house, the petitioner followed her, caught hold of her, attempted to drag her to a secluded place with an indecent intention, and when she resisted, threw her onto the road, tore her blouse, assaulted her with fists, struck her on the head with a brick, causing injuries and snatched her mangalsutra and earrings before fleeing from the spot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in between the parties there is case and counter case and both the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39051 of 2026(3) dt.28-07-2026 2/2 parties are neighbours and in between them there is a land dispute on account of drainage issue and allegations levelled by the informant in the FIR are totally false. The witnesses examined during the investigation are not independent but are interested witnesses who are closely associated with the victim.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer of the petitioner.

6. Considering the seriousness of the allegations appearing against the petitioner from the FIR who not only tried to outrage the modesty of the informant but also assaulted her when she resisted and in this regard, the victim's injury report is relevant which shows that she sustained three injuries, two of which were found on her head and further, the case is under investigation and the FIR has been registered by the victim herself who has remained consistent regarding her allegations before the I.O., in my opinion, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer stands rejected.

(Shailendra Singh, J) BKS/- U T