Rajnish Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76109 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- RATWARA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Rajnish Kumar Singh S/O Late Vijayeshwar Prasad Singh Resident Of Village- Alam Nagar, Police Station- Alam Nagar, Disrtict- Madhepura. Presently Residing At - M.A-62, Housing Adityapur, P.S-Adityapur, DistrictSaraikela, Kharsawan, Jharkhand-831013 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Avinash Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the husband of the informant had purchased 4 kattha of land from Manish Kumar Singh on 05.12.2023 and since then his brother (petitioner) was threatening her husband not to take possession of the land. It is alleged that for the said reason this petitioner under a conspiracy killed the husband of the informant on 23.04.2025 at about 09:00 PM with the help of shooter, namely, Vipin Kumar Sharma and 4-5 others.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76109 of 2025(2) dt.18-11-2025 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is land dispute between the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner has got several criminal antecedents. There is specific allegation against this petitioner that he with the help of other co-accused persons killed the husband of the informant. Hence, he does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the accusation and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) AjayMishra/- U T