IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14374 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2025 Thana- NOWKOTHI GARHPURA District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1. Saurabh kumar @ saurav singh son of Manoj Singh Resident Of Vill - Naokothi @ Nawkothhi, Ward no. 08, Ps- Naokothi @ Nawkothhi, Dist- Begusarai 2. Shivam Kumar @ Shivam Singh Son of Shushil Kumar @ Shushil Singh @ Sarla Resident Of Vill - Naokothi @ Nawkothhi, Ward no. 05, Ps- Naokothi @ Nawkothhi, Dist- Begusarai 3. Karka @ Piyush @ Piyush Kumar Son of Ashok Kumar Singh @ Pintu Singh Resident Of Vill - Naokothi @ Nawkothhi, Ps- Naokothi @ Nawkothhi, Dist- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar For the State : Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay For the informant : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 2 25-03-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Naokaothi @ Nawkothhi Police Station Case No. 224 of 2025, dated 02.12.2025, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/308(3)/324(4)/329(3)/329 (4)/74/352/351(2)/351(3)/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14374 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 2/4 3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that on 01.12.2025, at about 11:50 AM, the accused persons, including the petitioners, variously armed, entered into the house of the informant abusing him and demanded Rs. 50,000/- as rangdari and threatened that the son of the informant would be abducted and killed if the informant did not give the extortion money. The accused persons tried to take away the son of the informant, which was protested by the sister-in-law (bhabhi) of the informant, upon which the accused persons started assaulting the sister-in-law (bhabhi) of the informant and when the informant and other family members tried to save her, the accused persons assaulted them also. The accused persons also damaged the motorcycle of the informant, took away Rs. 10,000/- from the box and some gold and silver ornaments. 4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to village rivalry. He further submits that there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons and no specific allegation of assault has been levelled against them. The injuries sustained by the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14374 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 3/4 victims are simple in nature and that too, on the non-vital part of their bodies. He further submits that except Section 74 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, all other sections are bailable in nature and from going through the First Information Report, it is crystal clear that there is no ingredients of Section 74 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 alleged in the First Information Report. 5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the accused persons are dictatorial persons of the locality. He further submits that the petitioner no. 1 has concealed his criminal antecedent in the present application inasmuch as it is mentioned in this application that the petitioner no. 1 has no criminal antecedent, whereas the petitioner no. 1 is involved in one criminal case. 6. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 privilege of anticipatory bail. 7. This application is dismissed so far as petitioner nos. 1 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14374 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026 4/4 and 2 are concerned. 8. Insofar as the petitioner no. 3 is concerned, it has been informed by learned Counsel for the informant that as per his instruction, the petitioner no. 3 has been declared juvenile. 9. In that view of the matter, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner no. 3 is disposed as not maintainable. 10.However, if it comes to the knowledge of learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petitioner no. 3 has not been declared juvenile, a fresh anticipatory bail application can be filed against the impugned order before this Court on behalf of the petitioner no. 3 only. Prabhakar Anand/- (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) U √ T √