IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26888 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-284 Year-2024 Thana- MOHIUDDIN NAGAR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Kumar Ray S/o Nand Kumar Ray R/o Village- Hatenpur Dhamaun, P.S.- Shahpur Patory, Distt.- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhay Shanker Singh, Adv. For the State : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr.Vishal Vikram Rana, Adv. Ms.Misha Bharti, Adv. Mr.Anurag Darshi, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mohiuddinnagar P.S. Case No. 284 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections-191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109, 103(1), 61(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) and 27 of the Arms Act. 3. According to FIR, the informant asked his grandson (the deceased) to bring some medicines and in course of returning to his house after taking medicines, as soon as his grandson reached near his house, 12 named accused persons Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26888 of 2025(3) dt.29-08-2025 2/3 including the petitioner started assaulting his grandson. The son of the informant went to rescue the injured. The accused persons assaulted badly to the son of the informant. His son apprised the informant that the accused persons badly assaulted him with daggers, lathi, iron rod, farsa etc. His son died in the way to the hospital. The reason behind the occurrence is stated that co- accused Saurav Singh used to tease the granddaughter of the informant and on protest, the accused persons had threatened to lift the granddaughter of the informant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, there was land dispute between the parties and one person of defense side had also lost his life and in this regard, the members of defense side had lodged a case against the prosecution side. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State have submitted that the petitioner and other accused persons named in the FIR badly assaulted the deceased, resulted into his death. The deceased himself apprised the name of the accused persons to his father (the informant). The postmortem report corroborates the allegation. They have also submitted that on exactly similar footing, the anticipatory bail petition of co-accused persons have Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26888 of 2025(3) dt.29-08-2025 3/3 been rejected in Cr. Misc. Nos. 23867 of 2025 and 15948 of 2025. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and accordingly, the same is rejected. kundan/- (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) U T