Dharmveer Yadav @ Dharmveer Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44272 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-66 Year-2026 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna ====================================================== Dharmveer Yadav @ Dharmveer Kumar S/O Late Vishnu Yadav @ Vishnu Dev Yadav R/O Vill- Goshain Gaun Ward no. 10, P.S- Ghoshwari, Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-07-2026

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

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 08.03.2026 at 07:30 PM, the petitioner along with three named accused persons came to his shop and accused persons fired with an intent to kill him, but informant was saved and the cartridge got stuck in a kiosk nearby.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44272 of 2026(2) dt.16-07-2026 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that specific allegation of firing is not alleged and even informant did not suffer any firearm injury and it is reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits that though specific allegation of firing is not alleged, but then informant alleges that petitioner along with three named accused persons came and they fired at him, but missed and the cartridge got stuck in a nearby kiosk. It is also submitted that from order impugned, it would manifest that two cartridges were recovered from the kiosk. It is next submitted that investigation in the case is continuing and if petitioner is innocent, police will submit final form, but for the present the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44272 of 2026(2) dt.16-07-2026 3/3

7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T