Priyanshu Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78046 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-694 Year-2025 Thana- MOHANIYA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Priyanshu Kumar Singh S/o Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Kumar Resident of villlage - Ward No. 10, Mohania, P.S - Mohania, District - Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Subhesh Pandey, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 05-01-2026
1. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, Mr. Subhesh Pandey.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 324(4), 324(5), 329(4), 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 61(2) of the BNS, 2023 read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf
2/5 of the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a student and the informant alleges that he was at his hotel on 08.08.
2025 when he received a call from his son in between 12:30-01:00 PM that an occurrence has taken place at the house, thus, the informant came home and saw broken windows of his car, thereafter at 02:00 PM, 11 named accused persons including the petitioner along with unknown accused came and fired at him and his brother, but they managed to save themselves, further Akash assaulted his brother Rudra Pratap with hockey stick causing fracture of his hand and damaged the vehicle, it is next alleged that reason for the occurrence is that informant's family donated land for Maharana Pratap college and are contesting case for saving the college property, as Anil Singh who retired as Principal of the college is trying to capture the property and during his tenure an amount of Rs.
75 Crores was misappropriated for which informant had petitioned this Court for being impleaded as a party in the pending proceeding, further the accused while fleeing have threatened that whosoever will oppose Anil Singh, he will be killed.
4. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
3/5 instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that no doubt, it is alleged that named accused persons along with unknown accused came and created ruckus at the residents of the informant and even assaulted his brother and other family members, but then specific allegation of assault is not against this petitioner. It is next submitted that there is allegation of firing against the named accused persons including the petitioner, but then the said allegation is exaggerated. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner next submits that he has a copy of the case diary and relying on Para-83 submits that from perusal of the same, it would manifest that during the course of investigation based on CCTV footage provided by the informant to the police, it was found that Vinay Kumar Singh @ Vinay Kumar was seen firing.
It is also submitted that from place of occurrence, one empty cartridge was also recovered. It is next submitted that in the CCTV footage the petitioner is not seen carrying a gun though is seen in the CCTV footage that he also threatened and assaulted.
4/5 accused persons to the house of the informant, but then petitioner is not a criminal and even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then it is his first offence and if petitioner is sent to judicial custody, his entire career would get jeopardized and chances are bright that he may come in contact with hardened criminals.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application, but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that in the CCTV footage, the petitioner is not seen firing.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mohania P.S. Case No. 694 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
5/5
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his father namely Jitendra Kumar Singh @ Jitendra Kumar.
8. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application is allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T