CR. MISC./44763/2026 of Munna Kumar Singh @ Himanshu Kumar Singh @ Himanshu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 17 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

17-08-2026 Heard Mr. Ravi Ranjan, learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State. The informant is represented through Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, learned Advocate.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Suppi P.S. Case No. 28 of 2026 registered for the offences under Sections 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 127(2), 352, 351(2), 303(2), 132, 3(5) and 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Allegedly on the given date and time of occurrence, all the F.I.R. named accused, eight in number, variously armed with Sword, Rod, Lathi, Danda, Farsa and other weapons came there and started abusing and assaulting the informant and her family members. It is stated that the petitioner along with another co-accused person put a rope in the neck of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44763 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026

informant and tried to drag her, due to which she get disrobed; when the informant and others called upon the police party by calling them on 112, this petitioner also dashed the vehicle of police personnel by his own Scorpio vehicle and misbehaved and assaulted them.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner taking this Court through the F.I.R. contended that even if the allegation is taken to be true, for the sake of argument, no case much less under Sections 132 and 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is made out; so far the other offences are concerned, they are bailable. The allegation with regard to dragging the informant by putting a rope in her neck is concerned, there was no intention to outrage her modesty and, as such, the case under Section 132 of the BNS is not made out. Furthermore, dashing the police vehicle with the Scorpio is not resulted into any injury, is the contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioner. Only on account of previous enmity, as the parties are agnates and they are bickering over the land dispute, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in this case.

5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State and the informant opposed the bail application and submit that the petitioner is carrying five criminal antecedent. The audacity of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44763 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026

the petitioner and his criminal bent of mind is writ large, as he not only dashed the police personnel’s vehicle, but also misbehaved and assaulted them. Moreover, in the said incidence, two police personnel sustained injuries.

6. Having considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the active participation of the petitioner in the crime, besides injuries sustained to the two police personnel; as stated by the informant, in the said occurrence and the criminal antecedent, this Court is not acceded the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected.

7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below preferably within a period of four weeks from today, the court below shall consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner without being prejudice by the order of this Court, as also taking note of the statement of the police personnel that they have not stated about this petitioner, who caused any injury.

uday/- (Harish Kumar, J) U T