Arbind Kumar @ Arbind Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11365 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2024 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Arbind Kumar @ Arbind Yadav S/O Ramsaran Singh R/O Village - Khalispur, P.S- Kako,Dist.- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Syed Alamdar Hussain Mr. Ashutosh Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-03-2025
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Kako Police Station Case No. 169 of 2024, dated 22.06.2024, disclosing offences under Sections 365/302/201/120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the statement made in the First Information Report, lodged by Kavita Devi, stating that on 19.06.2024, the informant's husband, namely, Nagendra Kumar, aged about 25 years, came to Pinjaura village. On 20.06.2024, at about 03:00 PM, informant's husband told that he was going to Jehanabad Station to drop his sister's husband. Subsequently, he went from his motorcycle and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11365 of 2025(2) dt.28-03-2025 2/3 said that he would return in the afternoon. However, he did not return till night and his mobile phones were found switched off. Upon search also, the informant, along with her family members, could not find the whereabouts of her husband.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Akhilesh Kumar, which would be evident from the impugned order. He next submits that Akhilesh Kumar and Puja Devi both are the relatives of the deceased, who were having eyes on the property of their sasural and in order to save their skin, the petitioner has falsely been implicated stating that the petitioner participated in the kidnapping and murder of the deceased. He further submits that no material has come against the petitioner except the confessional statement to connect him with the present offence, which has got no evidentiary value.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials available on records.
6. It appears that during course of investigation, some
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11365 of 2025(2) dt.28-03-2025 3/3 persons were arrested and the co-accused person, namely, Akhilesh Kumar, in his confessional statement, has disclosed the name of the petitioner as one of his accomplices. The confessional statement of the coaccused Akhilesh Kumar can be the basis of further investigation against the petitioner, which is still going on, for which, custodial interrogation may be required. This Court is not holding mini trial at his stage as such evidentiary value of material collected during investigation can not be gone into. Considering the aforesaid and gravity of the offence, nature of allegation and severity of punishment, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ashwani/- U T