Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9626/2026bail rejected

Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-22Mr. Justice Praveen Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9626 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-266 Year-2025 Thana- HARNAUT District- Nalanda ====================================================== Guddu Kumar Son of Subodh Kumar Yadav @Loha Singh@ Subodh Yadav @ Lala Singh Resident of Village- Cheron, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar No. I, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Harnaut P.S. Case No. 266 of 2025 dated 05.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of B.N.S

3. As per the allegation, the informant alleged that on 04.06.2025 at about 1.30 A.M. when the whole family was slept, four miscreants entered her house by roof. On hearing the noise, she woke up and saw that the miscreants were standing near his sleeping son, namely, Sunny Kumar, pointing pistol on him. and told to bring the key of Godrej and after getting the key, two of them entered into the adjacent room and open the lock of Godrej and took away ornaments and cash. They also took away three

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9626 of 2026(3) dt.22-04-2026 2/2 mobile phone and one T.V. which was installed in verandah. The informant has firm belief that total cost of stolen goods was at about Rs. 2,95,500/-(Two lakh ninety five thousand Five hundred).

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the name of the petitioner has transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused person. The petitioner has got one criminal antecedent also of similar nature.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the same is accordingly dismissed. (Praveen Kumar, J) shivam/- U T