Satish Kumar @ Pagali v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45826 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2025 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== Satish Kumar @ Pagali S/O Bhujal Gop Resident of Village- Nohata Chamara Gali, Police Station- Fatuha, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Ravi Shanker Pankaj, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-07-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 109, 121(2), 132, 303(2), 324(6), 326(g) and 352 of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act.

3. As per prosecution case, informant, namely Rupal Kumar Ambuj, who happens to be Inspector of Police, alleged that on 28.02.2025, he along with other police officials reached at the alleged place to verify the information regarding an accident. On reaching the place, it was found that one Sanu Kumar died and his dead body was sent for post mortem and when the tractor which was involved in the accident was being

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45826 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025 2/2 taken out, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner and about 200 unknown persons set the tractor on fire, started pelting stones on police officials and damaged public property.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. There are general and omnibus allegations and no specific accusation of overt act has been alleged against this petitioner. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he, along with other accused persons, damaged public property and pelted stones upon police officials as a result of which they sustained injuries.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T