Patna High CourtCR. MISC./88744/2025bail rejected

Mani Bhushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-15Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88744 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-462 Year-2025 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Mani Bhushan Kumar S/o Chndirka Rai R/o Village- Haripur, ward no 1, PSParoo, District- Muzaffarpur Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Yugal Kishore For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmala Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026

1. Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Paru (Paroo) P.S. Case No. 462 / 2025 dt. 30.08.2025 registered for the offence under Section 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2), 324(4), 329(3), 329(4), 326(a), 305, 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the F.I.R. on 27.08.2025 at 10:30 P.M. the petitioner along with 09 named accused persons and 10-15 unknown accused persons entered into the house of the informant and looted gold and silver ornaments and also looted Rs. 22,000/-, resorted to firing and burnt straw house. It has further been alleged that on 28.08.2025 when the informant was returning to his home then the accused persons attacked the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88744 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026 2/3 informant with lathi, danda, bhala but the informant anyhow tried to flee away from place of occurrence then the petitioner fired bullet upon the informant which hit the right leg of the informant and thereafter the informant ran towards his home and made noise then the villagers gathered and the accused persons fled away.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner has been dragged in the present case due to previous enmity between the petitioner and the informant. The present case is a counter blast of Paru P.S. Case No. 456 of 2025 lodged under Section 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 191(3) of the B.N.S. 2023 by the side of the petitioner. He further submits that though the alleged occurrence took place on 27.08.2025 however the F.I.R. has been lodged after three days delay on 30.08.2025 without any plausible explanation. He further submits that firing made by the petitioner hit on the right leg of the petitioner which is a non vital part of the body.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made by the parties

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88744 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026 3/3 and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he fired upon the informant, as such, in my opinion, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T