Patna High Court
CR. MISC./20870/2026 of ANUP KUMAR @ ANUP KUMAR SINGH Vs The State of Bihar on 15 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20870 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2025 Thana- KUDRA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== 1. ANUP KUMAR @ ANUP KUMAR SINGH S/O SHREE GOPAL SINGH R/o vill - Derwan, P.S.- Kudra,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20870 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-465 Year-2025 Thana- KUDRA District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
1.
ANUP KUMAR @ ANUP KUMAR SINGH S/O SHREE GOPAL SINGH
R/o vill - Derwan, P.S.- Kudra, Distt.- Kaimur (Bhabua)
2.
Harendra Singh @ Harendra Kumar S/o Shree Gopal Singh R/o vill - Derwan, P.S.- Kudra, Distt.- Kaimur (Bhabua)
3.
Gopal Singh S/o Late Viswanath Singh R/o vill - Derwan, P.S.- Kudra, Distt.- Kaimur (Bhabua)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Advocate
For the State
:
Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
For the Informant
:
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
15-07-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application of petitioner no.2, Harendra Singh @ Harendra Kumar as he has been arrested during the pendency of the petition.
2. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of petitioner no.2, Harendra Singh @ Harendra Kumar stands rejected.
3. Heard Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the informant as also learned APP representing the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20870 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026
4. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Kundra P.S. Case No. 465 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 118(2), 126(2), 109(1), 74, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and section 25(1-B)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act, lodged on 03.12.2025 by the informant Rameqbal Singh.
5. As per the prosecution story, the allegation is that earlier Anup Kumar Singh drove Tractor in a rash and negligent manner and damage the wall of the house of the informant. Upon objecting to it, the family members assembled and the allegation is that Harendra gave rod blow to Vijay Shankar, the informant’s brother on the head causing injury. Further, Anup assaulted the informant by butt of country made pistol again on the head, the petitioner no.3, Gopal Singh also was in the list of accused who assaulted. This led to the F.I.R.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is case and counter case, both side suffered, in fact, one of the accused in the present case, Shriram Singh died of the injuries sustained during the assault, some other accused persons have been granted bail/anticipatory bail.
7. Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel for the informant submits that the informant has filed counter Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20870 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026
affidavit and took this Court to paragraph no.5 to show that the petitioner no.3 has not correctly recorded his criminal antecedents inasmuch as while the petition shows that he has four criminal antecedents, actually, he has some other cases also which relates to major section like 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in most of such case, acquittal has been made.
9. Taking into account the submissions of the parties as also the role that has come against these petitioners coupled with the fact that they have criminal antecedents, no case of anticipatory bail is made out.
10. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
vinayak/- (Rajiv Roy, J) U T