Arjun Ray @ Arjun Rai v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87395 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- AWTARNAGAR District- Saran ====================================================== Arjun Ray @ Arjun Rai Son of Jaibu Ray R/o Village - Saidpur, P.S. - Awtar Nagar, Dist. - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Raushan Raj For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case, registered for offence punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 115(2), 103(1), 352, 351(3), 351(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per F.I.R., on 14.03.2025 at 5 PM, on account of previous dispute, all the named accused including petitioner came and took away husband of informant near Jhowa Dhala NH-19 and brutally assaulted him with Lathi, Danda and Labdha and thereby committed his murder.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been made accused in this case merely because he happens to be relative of co-accused Mahendra Rai, with whom, informant had land dispute. He further submits that co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87395 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026 2/2 Lalu Rai has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 19.11.2025 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 79806 of 2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner and submits that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he along with others took away husband of informant and committed his murder. He next submits that petitioner cannot claim parity with co-accused Lalu Rai, as he was not named in the F.I.R. and his name transpired during investigation.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T