IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5402 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-653 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1. Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Rai Son of Shivchandra Ray Resident of Village - Tada Singhara, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali at Hajipur. 2. Amarjeet Kumar @ Amarjeet Rai Son of Shivchandra Ray Resident of Village - Tada Singhara, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali at Hajipur. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioners : Ms. Sudha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 308(5), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.. 3. As per prosecution case, on 09.06.2025 at about 6 PM, when the informant was returning from his daughter’s sasural and reached at Tara Singhara village, in the meantime, both these accused-petitioners, along with five unknown persons, stopped him and demanded Rangdari and when the informant opposed, all of them took out pistol and Petitioner No. 1 assaulted informant with butt of pistol and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5402 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026 2/3 thereafter, all the accused persons snatched gold chain and Rs. 50,000/- cash from the informant. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence. Both parties are co-villagers and due to petty dispute, maar-peet took place between the parties in which both sides sustained injuries. There is case and counter- case. There is no specific accusation of overt act against Petitioner No. 2. Petitioner No. 2 claims clean antecedents. 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that they, along with five unknown persons, intercepted the informant, assaulted him with butt of pistol and snatched gold chain and cash from pocket of informant. There is specific accusation against Petitioner No. 1 of demanding Rangdari and assaulting the informant. Petitioner No. 1 has got one criminal antecedent which was registered for the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and criminal Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5402 of 2026(2) dt.03-02-2026 3/3 antecedent of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1 is rejected. 7. So far as Petitioner No. 2 is concerned, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, case and counter-case between the parties and clean antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 2 is allowed. 8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named Petitioner No. 2 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.J.-V-cum-A.C.J.M.-IV, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 653 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.. 9. With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of. shashank/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T