Patna High Court
Harendra Kumar @ Harendra Ray @ Harendra RoyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The Court denied the petitioner's anticipatory bail.
Summary
Harendra Kumar, a driver, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving alleged assault, attempted murder and illegal use of a firearm. The prosecution alleged that on 31 August 2025, Kumar and others assaulted an informant and the informant was shot, sustaining injuries. The petitioner claimed innocence, clean antecedents and that he was falsely implicated. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences under multiple IPC sections and the Arms Act. Considering the petitioner’s alleged involvement and the gravity of the charges, the Court refused to grant anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the alleged offences under the IPC and Arms Act
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged participation in the assault and shooting justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2)(3), 352, 49
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- assault
- attempted murder
- bail denial
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92023 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1441 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
======================================================
Harendra Kumar @ Harendra Ray @ Harendra Roy S/O Bhawan Singh
Driver of Lav Kush Singh R/O Amirpur, P.S.- Nawa Nagar, District- Buxar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raj Krishna Jha, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Phulwari Sharif P.S. Case No. 1441 of 2025, registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 49, 109,
352, 351(2)(3), 3(5) B.N.S. and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on
31.08.2025 at 02:30 p.m., the informant gave his fardbeyan
stating therein that the informant and the accused Lav Kush
Singh was doing business of sale and purchase of land. Two
years back the dispute arose between them on the point of
money and after accountancy both of them started separate
business. There was dues of Rs.80 Lacs upon Lav Kush Singh
which was continuously demanded by the informant. On
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92023 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
31.08.2025 at about 08:45 a.m., a telephonic call was made to
Rajesh Kumar, elder brother of the informant, and called them
to his house. Both of them went there and reached at the door of
Lav Kush Singh and saw that Lav Kush Singh, his younger son
Sachin Kumar Chotu, maternal brother Gautam Kumar Gautam
Singh, driver Harendra Kumar Harendra Roy and 6-7 unknown
persons were talking at the door of Lav Kush Singh. Upon
seeing them, he said accountancy has to be done. After hearing
this, accused persons started assaulting the informant with slaps
and fists and he fell down on the earth. Meanwhile, wife of Lav
Kush Singh namely Savita Devi and maid Sumina Devi came
out of the house and Savita Devi said to kill him. Thereafter.
Lav Kush Singh went into the house and came out with a small
weapon and fired three-four bullet on the informant due to
which the informant sustained two bullet injuries on his left leg
and thigh. Accordingly. FIR was registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to
ulterior motive of the informant. He further submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92023 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the entire facts and keeping in view the
involvement of the petitioner in the offence as well as nature of
accusation and gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to
grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
kiran/-
U T
Checking your session…