Priyanshu Kumar @ Priyanshu Rai @ Priyanshu Raj v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47750 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2026 Thana- VIDYAPATINAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Priyanshu Kumar @ Priyanshu Rai @ Priyanshu Raj S/O Sanjeev Kumar Chaudhari @ Sanjeev Kumar Chaudhary @ Sanjeev Kumar R/O Village - Sherpur (Dhepura), P.S.- Vidyapatinagar, District - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Durgesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The present criminal miscellaneous application has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BNSS, 2023') for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in connection with Vidyapati Nagar P.S. Case No. 60 of 2026, lodged on 15.03.2026, under Sections 103(1)/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of learned ACJM-II, Dalsinghsarai, Samastipur.

3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against nine named and one unknown accused persons with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47750 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 2/2 allegation that the petitioner in connivance with other accused persons murdered the son of the informant.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that antecedent of the petitioner is not clean. He submits that during investigation, it has come that on the date of occurrence the petitioner was in Patna. He submits that it is the petitioner who informed about the occurrence. He submits that the petitioner is ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean and there are two criminal cases pending against the petitioner.

6. Considering the criminal antecedents as well as nature of allegation against the petitioner, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is hereby refused. However, in the event of surrender of the petitioner within six weeks from today, the prayer for regular bail shall be considered on the same day without being prejudiced by the order of this Court. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T