Pintu Pandey @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2619 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-294 Year-2025 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Pintu Pandey @ Pintu Kumar S/O Late Dhenuk Pandey Resident of Village - Chamanpura, P.S- Baikunthpur, Dist.- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Subhash Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Lokesh Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), 329(3), 351(3), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this petitioner abused and assaulted father of informant and fired upon him due to which, father of informant sustained gun shot injury.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2619 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026 2/2 committed no offence. As a matter of fact, both parties are Gotiyas and petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific accusation that he shot father of informant due to which he sustained fire arm injury. Doctor has found the injury, sustained by the injured, grievous in nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence and nature of injuries allegedly caused by this petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T