Dismissed¶21

Kamendar Kumar @ Kavindar Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 May 2025CR. MISC./7239/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected - Patna HC CR. MISC. No.7239 of 2025 (13-05-2025), Anil Kumar Sinha, J - FIR Shahpur P.S. Case No.342/2024 dt.11.10.2024, Ss.103(1), 3(5) BNS 2023 + S.27 Arms Act - murder/land dispute, warrant taken, custodial interrogation may be necessary, strong suspicion in FIR - petitioner Kamendar Kumar @ Kavindar Prasad v. State of Bihar.

What did the court decide?

Strong suspicion raised against the petitioner in the first information report, and the warrant already taken by the police in order to complete the investigation, weighed against granting anticipatory bail. ¶21

Kamendar Kumar @ Kavindar Prasad Vs The State of… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7239 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2024 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Kamendar Kumar @ Kavindar Prasad S/o Sri Ram Babu Rai Resident of village- Ghusuk Tola, (Usri Khurd), P.S.- Shahpur, District- Patna

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nirmala Kumari ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 13-05-2025 1. Heard the parties.

¶12

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with

¶13

Shahpur P.S. Case No. 342 of 2024 dt: 11.10.2024 registered under section 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶14

As per the first information report on 11.10.2024 at about 7:00 A.M. while the informant’s father, who is a driver of the cart carrying garbage was going, two unknown persons sitting on a motorcycle overtook him near village Usri Khurd and shot his father dead. Another bullet fired by the accused persons crossed after touching the body of Raju Manjhi who was sitting in the vehicle along with informant’s father. The informant has raised suspicion upon the petitioner as well as two other accused persons and said that his father has been killed

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7239 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025 2/3

¶16

due to land dispute.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion only and the F.I.R. is in three parts. First part is that while the informant’s father was driving the garbage vehicle he was shot dead by unknown bikers. Secondly he has raised suspicion upon two other accused persons Ajeet Saw and Arvind Saw who used to pressurize the informant’s father to grab his 04 katha land situated behind the petrol pump near Shivala and third part is against petitioner that he used to threaten the informant’s father and pressurize him to transfer the land in his favour failing which he will be shot dead. Learned counsel next submits that except suspicion there is no other material to connect the petitioner with the present offence.

¶18

On the other hand, learned counsel for the state referring to the case diary submits that on the basis of initial investigation and suspicion raised against the petitioner the police has taken warrant against the petitioner in order to unearth / investigate the case in the right direction. The supervising authority has found the case as true.

¶19

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that strong suspicion has been raised

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7239 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025 3/3

¶21

in first information report against the petitioner and further the police in order to complete the investigation in the present case has taken warrant against the petitioner accordingly I am not inclined to grant anticipatory to the petitioner inasmuch custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary in the present case. The prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

¶22

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)

¶23

praful/-

¶24

U T

Kamendar Kumar @ Kavindar Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamendar Kumar @ Kavindar Prasad v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopal Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Shambhu Kumar Rajak Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Mustiyak @ Mustiyar Vs The State of Bihar

Vikki Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Nayan @ Mukesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dhikal Kumar @ Sarjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar