Mahendra Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44319 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-697 Year-2025 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Mahendra Rai S/O Late Rajendra Rai R/O Village- Bidhipur, P.S.- Salimpur, Distt.- Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K. Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP :

Mr. Birendra Singh, Adv.

:

Mr. Bipin Kumar Deo, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-07-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 352, 117(2) and 109 of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that he along with his cousin Gaurav and Akash on 18.12.2025 at 5:25 PM reached near four-lane crossing, when they were intercepted by nine named accused persons including the petitioner and Rakesh along with Vikash fired causing injury on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44319 of 2026(2) dt.20-07-2026 2/3 his right leg, thereafter petitioner and Raj Kumar fired causing injury on his left thigh while Golden, Pravin and Tulsi assaulted by rod causing injury on thigh, further Kunal and Gautam assaulted Gaurav and Akash by lathi, thereafter police came and accused fled.

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 allegations as alleged in the FIR, it manifest that though petitioner along with Raj Kumar is alleged to have fired causing injury on left thigh of the petitioner, but then allegation of firing is not specific.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant received two firearm injuries, one on his right leg and other on his left thigh. It is further submitted that even if allegation of firing is not specific but then presence of the petitioner at the place of occurrence emboldened other accused to commit the occurrence of firing leading to injury. It is also submitted that investigation in the case is continuing and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44319 of 2026(2) dt.20-07-2026 3/3 petitioner has antecedent of one case and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond or try to tamper with the evidence.

6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court is in complete agreement to the submissions made by the learned APP and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, as such, the anticipatory bail application is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) rajesh/- U T