Rupesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13818 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2020 Thana- JANKINAGAR District- Purnia ====================================================== Rupesh Kumar Son of Dukha Yadav Resident of Village -Garhiya, ward No 10, PS -Kumarkhand, Dist- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bambahadur Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 24-06-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jankinagar P.S. Case No. 101 of 2020 for the offence under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 17.07.2020 by the informant, Baleshwar Tatma.
3. The FIR came to be lodged on 17.07.2020 by the chowkidar of the Jankinager Police Station recording that a headless body was found near the canal and upon information, the chowkidar went there and found the said body with injuries on it and without any head. This led to the FIR.
4. The investigation took place, the accused named, and accordingly, the judicial process rolled on. Subsequently, the name of the petitioner also cropped up in the year 2022. This necessitated filing of the anticipatory bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13818 of 2026(3) dt.24-06-2026 2/2
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier, he was not named nor sent up but later, the Court took cognizance of the matter as a result whereof he has presented himself with the application for anticipatory bail.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that a headless body was found, the brutality can be seen from the fact that the head was missing. The investigation/facts of the case took the matter to the doors of the petitioner in the year 2022 itself but he choose to take his own time in filing the anticipatory bail application.
7. Considering the submission of the parties as also the kind of case that has come and subsequently, petitioner has been found to be an accused, in that background, it would be appropriate that he seeks bail.
8. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T