Kailash Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44509 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2026 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== 1.

Kailash Das S/o Late Chunchun Das R/o Amarpur Block, P.S.- Amarpur, Banka, Bihar 2.

Badal Das S/o Kailash Das R/o Amarpur Block, P.S.- Amarpur, Banka, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Madan Mohan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 27-07-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 308(4) and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 has antecedent of four cases and petitioner no. 2 has antecedent of three cases. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that informant alleges that on 17.02.2026 at 9:00 P.M. her husband Vibhash Das was returning home and when he reached near the bridge near Kali Sthan, five accused persons, namely, Badal, Kailash, Nandkishore, Choudhary Das and Suman intercepted him and started abusing and demanded Rs. 2,000/- to purchase liquor, on protest, her husband was assaulted with knife

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44509 of 2026(2) dt.27-07-2026 2/2 causing injury.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence, it is next submitted that even the nature of assault is general and omnibus in nature.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that petitioners are criminals having antecedent of four and three cases, it is next submitted that no doubt allegation of assault is not specific but allegation is of assaulting the husband of the informant by knife and from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be grievous in nature. It is further submitted that if the privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, the petitioners may abscond as they have criminal antecedent.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikram/- U T