Patna High Court

Mani Bhushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANIL KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The court held that anticipatory bail cannot be granted where the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and directly alleged to have fired upon the informant.

Summary

Mani Bhushan Kumar was alleged to have participated in a robbery on 27-08-2025, during which gold, silver ornaments and cash were stolen, a house was set on fire, and the informant was shot in the leg. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming the case was a retaliatory filing stemming from personal enmity and that the FIR was lodged three days after the incident without justification. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing that the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR and directly accused of firing at the informant. The court examined the allegations and the petitioner’s inclusion in the FIR. Concluding that the circumstances did not merit anticipatory bail, the court rejected the petitioner's bail application.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a person specifically named in an FIR and directly alleged to have fired upon a victim.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 305, 324(4), 326(a), 329(3), 329(4), 351(2), 351(3), 352

Subjects

anticipatory bail
FIR
Indian Penal Code
criminal liability
looting
firing
bail jurisprudence

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88744 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-462 Year-2025 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Mani Bhushan Kumar S/o Chndirka Rai R/o Village- Haripur, ward no 1, PS-
                 Paroo, District- Muzaffarpur Bihar

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Yugal Kishore
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Nirmala Kumari
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026           1. Heard the parties.

                         2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with

                   Paru (Paroo) P.S. Case No. 462 / 2025 dt. 30.08.2025 registered

                   for the offence under Section 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2),

                   324(4), 329(3), 329(4), 326(a), 305, 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3) of

                   the B.N.S.

                         3. As per the F.I.R. on 27.08.2025 at 10:30 P.M. the

                   petitioner along with 09 named accused persons and 10-15

                   unknown accused persons entered into the house of the

                   informant and looted gold and silver ornaments and also looted

                   Rs. 22,000/-, resorted to firing and burnt straw house. It has

                   further been alleged that on 28.08.2025 when the informant was

                   returning to his home then the accused persons attacked the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88744 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                            2/3




          informant with lathi, danda, bhala but the informant anyhow

          tried to flee away from place of occurrence then the petitioner

          fired bullet upon the informant which hit the right leg of the

          informant and thereafter the informant ran towards his home

          and made noise then the villagers gathered and the accused

          persons fled away.

                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name

          of the petitioner has been dragged in the present case due to

          previous enmity between the petitioner and the informant. The

          present case is a counter blast of Paru P.S. Case No. 456 of 2025

          lodged under Section 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109,

          303(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3), 191(3) of the B.N.S. 2023 by the

          side of the petitioner. He further submits that though the alleged

          occurrence took place on 27.08.2025 however the F.I.R. has

          been lodged after three days delay on 30.08.2025 without any

          plausible explanation. He further submits that firing made by the

          petitioner hit on the right leg of the petitioner which is a non

          vital part of the body.

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

          opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that

          petitioner is specifically named in the F.I.R.

                6. Regard being had to the submissions made by the parties
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88744 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                           3/3




                         and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is named in

                         the F.I.R. and there is direct allegation against the petitioner that

                         he fired upon the informant, as such, in my opinion, it is not a fit

                         case for grant of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for

                         grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.



                                                  (Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-

U          T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…