Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Nayak @ Karu Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49081 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2025 Thana- KASHICHAK District- Nawada ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Nayak @ Karu Mahto, S/O Devendra Mahto R/O Village- Madhepur, P.S.- Kashichak, Distt.- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudish Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kashichak P.S. Case No. 165 of 2025 dated 19.11.2025 registered for the offences punishable under sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 352 & 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 19.11.2025 at about 9:50 A.M., the informant and his companion were allegedly surrounded by the petitioner along with 8-10 unknown persons and after enquiring about their village and caste, the petitioner and other accused persons allegedly assaulted the informant and his companion with iron rod, sticks and lathis, causing them injuries. It is further alleged that the accused persons snatched 15,000 from the informant. ₹

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49081 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 2/2 the allegations levelled in the FIR against the petitioner are not believable in view of the injuries sustained by the injured persons, as altogether 10 persons are alleged to have stopped the informant and his companion and thereafter, they assaulted them. Though against the petitioner, there are criminal antecedents of four cases, however, out of them, three were lodged several years ago between 2006 and 2013 and only one case was lodged in the year 2022 and the petitioner is on bail in all those cases.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer of the petitioner.

6. Considering the seriousness of the allegation appearing against the petitioner who allegedly assaulted the informant and his companion, resulting in fracture injury to the informant, as appears from the FIR, coupled with petitioner's four criminal antecedents and also the fact that the case is under investigation, in my opinion, the petitioner does not deserve the relief of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, his prayer stands rejected.

(Shailendra Singh, J) annu/- U T