IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19162 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-943 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Niraj Kumar Rai @ Neeraj Kumar Rai S/O Tarkeshwar Rai @ Truck Rai R/O Village- Kalyanpur, P.O- Baijalpur, P.S- Sonepur, Distt.- Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajiv Nayan Ms.Priyanka Singh Ms.Eashita Raj ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 06-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. 2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in Sonepur P. S. Case No. 943 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has antecedent of three cases and the informant alleges that on 06.09.2025, Deepak along with petitioner attempted to snatch his bike. On protest, the accused stabbed him for which Sonepur P. S. Case No. 937 of 2025 was instituted. It is next alleged that the accused persons including Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19162 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026 2/3 the petitioner were pressurizing to compromise the earlier case but informant refused, thereafter on 16.09.2025 at 7.00 P.M. when informant was returning from Sonepur when he was intercepted by the named accused persons including the petitioner and petitioner assaulted him by butt of pistol causing injury on head. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that a dispute in between the petitioner and the informant is already going on and a false case by the informant has been instituted against the petitioner and others being Sonepur P. S. Case No. 937 of 2025. 5. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that informant specifically alleges that earlier he was stabbed for which Sonepur P. S. Case No. 937 of 2025 was instituted in which petitioner is also an accused and petitioner along with others were pressurizing the informant to compromise the said case but when informant refused, the instant occurrence was committed i.e. petitioner assaulted him by butt of pistol causing injury on head. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may try Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19162 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026 3/3 to tamper with the evidence. 6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail stands rejected. vikash/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T