Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Tripurari Jha @ Babloo @ Tripurari Kumar JhaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was refused.

Summary

The petitioner, Tripurari Jha, applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged under Sections 118(2), 324(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita relating to a theft and shooting incident at a grocery shop on 6 March 2025, which resulted in injuries to two persons. The petitioner contended that he was not named in the FIR and that his name only emerged during investigation, asserting his innocence. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the seriousness of the offences, the fact that two individuals sustained bullet injuries, and the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent of a similar nature. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the nature of the accusations and the petitioner’s criminal history. Consequently, the Court refused the petitioner's request for anticipatory bail.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita given the alleged offences and his prior criminal antecedent.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • criminal antecedent
  • Theft
  • Shooting
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • High Court
  • bail refusal

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4301 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2025 Thana- ASHOK PAPER MILL District-
                                                        Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Tripurari Jha @ Babloo @ Tripurari Kumar Jha S/O Late Shivnath Jha @
                 Bipin Jha Resident of Village- Pipraulia, P.S.- Ashok Paper Mill, Dist.-
                 Darbhanga

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Saurav Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-04-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

                                2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Ashok Paper Mill

                   (APM) P. S. Case No. 36 of 2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 118(2), 324(2), 109, 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

                                3. As per F.I.R., on 6.3.2025 at about 2 AM, 8-10

                   unknown miscreants committed theft in the grocery shop of

                   informant and opened fire as a result of which, son and driver of

                   the informant sustained firearms injury. It is further alleged that

                   the accused persons also tried to commit theft in two other

                   shops adjacent to the shop of informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4301 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
                                                          2/2




                        is not named in the F.I.R. and his name transpired during course

                        of investigation.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed

                        the bail application and submitted that petitioner has got one

                        criminal antecedent of similar nature and in this case, two

                        persons sustained bullet injuries.

                                     6. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal

                        antecedent, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

                        refused.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.