Rajeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14490 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1024 Year-2024 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== Rajeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Yadav, Son of Late Jadish Yadav, Resident of Village- Chandni Chowk, Ward No. 02, P.S.- Madhpura, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Pooja Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 1024 of 2024 dated 03.09.2024 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 304 of Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on the alleged date of occurrence, when the informant was travelling on his motorcycle bearing Reg. No. BR43Z-2630, two co-accused persons, namely, Rahul Kumar & Bikash Kumar surrounded the informant and snatched his motorcycle at the behest of the petitioner, Ranjeet Yadav stating that due amount of motorcycle i.e. Rs. 10,000/- has not been given by the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14490 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026 2/3 petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered either from conscious possession of the petitioner or from his house. The specific allegation of snatching the motorcycle is against coaccused Rahul Kumar & Vikash Kumar. The said motorcycle was recovered from the yard of co-accused Shashi Yadav on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar @ Bikash Kumar. The petitioner is the recovery agent. Lastly, it has been submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. From the Case Diary, it appears that in paragraph no. 28 of the Case Diary, co-accused Rahul Kumar has confessed the involvement of the petitioner and stated that the said motorcycle was kept in the yard of Shashi Yadav. In paragraph no. 42 of the Case Diary, Independent witness, Prince Kumar has said that the petitioner and co-accused Rahul Kumar & Nitish Kumar came with the said motorcycle of the informant and kept the same in the yard of Shashi Yadav. This witness has fully supported the case of the prosecution.
7. Since there is specific allegation against the petitioner in this crime, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14490 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026 3/3 bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner stands rejected.
(Khatim Reza, J) premchand/- U