Patna High Court
Vishwakarma Kumar @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak @ Vish Karma KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the allegations were specific and the petitioner had prior criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Vishwakarma Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR alleging that he, along with others, entered the informant's shop on 19-09-2025, destroyed a CCTV camera, forcibly closed the shop and threatened the informant, and repeated similar acts on 20-09-2025. The prosecution charged him under Sections 324(4) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26, 35 and 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and maintained his innocence, while the State highlighted the specific accusations and his two prior criminal antecedents. The court examined the specificity of the allegations, the seriousness of the offences, and the petitioner’s criminal record. Concluding that the nature of the accusation was direct and the antecedents were material, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the FIR and his criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedents
- Arms Act
- assault
- destruction of property
- FIR
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7026 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2025 Thana- JURAWANPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Vishwakarma Kumar @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak @ Vish Karma Kumar
S/O Raj Kumar Ray R/O Vill.- Jurawanpur Barati, P.S.- Jurawanpur, District-
Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ravish Mishra, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Rajni Kant, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 19-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 324(4) and
3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 and 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, on 19.09.2025 at about
9:30 PM, this petitioner, along with another F.I.R. named and
five unknown accused persons, came to the shop of informant
and thereafter, this petitioner fired on the C.C.T.V. camera and
destroyed the same and forcibly closed the shop and threatened
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7026 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
2/2
the informant. It is further alleged that on 20.09.2025, the
accused persons again came to the shop of informant, fired three
bullets and again threatened the informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in
this case with ulterior motive.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and
submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific
accusation that he, along with other accused persons, came to
the shop of informant, fired and destroyed the C.C.T.V. camera
and threatened the informant. Petitioner has got two criminal
antecedents.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and criminal
antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…