Sunny Kumar @ Sarvjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10531 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2022 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sunny Kumar @ Sarvjeet Kumar S/O Late Ravindra Singh R/o Village Raghopur, P.S.- Judawanpur, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Md Soban Asghar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dinesh Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH CHANDEL ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

2. This is the first bail application for grant of anticipatory bail of the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 332/2022 registered for the offence under Sections 399, 402, 414, of IPC, and 25(1B)a/26/35 of the Arms Act.

3. According to the case of prosecution, it is alleged that on 27.11.2022 at about 1:30 mid-night the informant Sanjeet Kumar, ASI along with police party on the basis of information received by the informant reached on the spot and it was found that some persons were gathered there and made planning for committing dacoity. On seeing of them, three persons were fled away from the spot and Rajiv Rai and Manjit

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10531 of 2025(4) dt.13-08-2025 2/3 Kumar were taken into custody and from their possession, some Katta and cartridges were seized. On being inquired, they informed the name of other persons who were fled away from the spot. On the basis of these backgrounds offence has been registered.

4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that petitioner is not involved in the alleged crime and he was also not caught by the police party on the spot. His name is only disclosed by co-accused Rajiv Rai and Manjit Kumar. Apart from this, there is no evidence available on record to implicate them in the alleged crime in question. Lastly , he also submits that the coaccused Rajiv Rai and Manjit Kumar have already been granted regular bail by the Trial Court itself. Therefore, on these grounds, it is prayed that the petitioner may also be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submits that there are eight criminal anticidents of this applicant therefore, on this ground alone, he is not entitled to get any relief.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10531 of 2025(4) dt.13-08-2025 3/3

6. Heard.

7. Perused the records and other materials available on record.

8. Considering the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner and further considering the fact that the name of the present applicant has been disclosed by the co-accused persons without further commenting other merits of the case, I am of the view that it is a case where the petitioner should be granted benefit of anticipatory bail.

9. Accordingly, the application is allowed.

10. Let the above named petitioner be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1st Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Raghopur P.S. Case No. 332/2022 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of B.N.S.S 2023.

(Arvind Singh Chandel , J) krishnakant/- U T