IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16743 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-277 Year-2025 Thana- EKMA District- Saran ====================================================== Suraj Maharaj @ Suraj Kumar Ray S/o- Rakesh Kumar Ray @ Jayesh Maharaj R/v- Ekma Bhatt Toli (Bhantoli) Ps- Ekma Dist- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 3 29-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 277 of 2025, for allegedly having committed offence under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the farbeyan of the informant to the effect that on 20.07.2025 at about 07:30 P.M., the son of the informant was going to Ekma market on his motorcycle, however at a distance of around 100 meters from the house, he was killed by fire-arms by unknown criminals. The informant received information through mobile phone of his father, after which, he came to the place of the occurrence and saw his son lying Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16743 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026 2/3 unconscious. Thereafter, he was taken to Sadar Hospital, Chapra, where he was declared dead. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused Upendra Kumar Mahto and except the confessional statement of the co- accused, nothing has come during course of investigation against the petitioner. The petitioner being a student, engaged in preparation of different competitive examinations and also qualified certain competitive examination. He is presently engaged in a private job. He further submits that the son of the informant was an antisocial element and he had enmity with several persons in the locality, therefore there is a chance that he would have been killed by some enemies and the name of the petitioner has been taken by the co-accused Upendra Kumar Mahto at the behest of some villagers, who are on inimical terms with the petitioner. 5. The learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner by referring to paragraph no.64 of the case diary and submits that the co- accused Upendra Kumar Mahto in his confessional statement has taken the name of the petitioner to be the participant in the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16743 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026 3/3 crime. 6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going through the records, it appears that although the petitioner has not been named in the first information report, however his named transpired during course of investigation and the co- accused Upendra Kumar Mahto has named him as his accomplish in the crime. The petitioner is also an accused in two other cases, however in the said cases, he has been acquitted. Since, the petitioner has been named as an accomplish of co- accused Upendra Kumar Mahto, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. AjayMishra/- (Ritesh Kumar, J) U T