Patna High Court
Sanjeev Kumar @ MafiaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjeev Kumar, was implicated in a FIR alleging that he shot and killed the mother of an informant. He faced charges under Sections 126(2), 118(1), 109(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S., Section 27 of the Arms Act and later Section 103 of the B.N.S. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence and clean antecedents, while alleging that village politics led to false implication. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the specific accusation of causing a fatal gun‑shot injury. After considering the seriousness of the offences, the direct nature of the accusation and the gravity of the case, the Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the specific and serious charges under the B.N.S. and the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- arms act
- criminal procedure
- bail denial
- serious offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8609 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2025 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna
======================================================
Sanjeev Kumar @ Mafia Son of Judagi Yadav @ Judagi Prasad Resident of
Village - Lemuabad, P.S. - Pandarak, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2),
118(1), 109(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the
Arms Act and later on, Section 103 of the B.N.S. was added.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this
petitioner killed the mother of informant by firing gunshot.
4. It is submitted by learned senior counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and
has committed no offence. Both parties are co-villagers and due
to village politics, petitioner has falsely been implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8609 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
case. Petitioner 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 petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
and there is specific accusation that he caused gun shot injury to
mother of informant due to which, during course of treatment,
she died.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of
offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner
is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.