Anand Kumar @ Anil v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15658 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-839 Year-2025 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Anand Kumar @ Anil S/O Dinesh Prasad Sah R/O Vill.- Rampur Dayal Bandra, P.S- Piar, Dist- Muzaffarpur(Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 839 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(3) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the victim son of the informant went missing on 27.09.2025, when he had gone outside to purchase some articles.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false, when petitioner is not named in the FIR. As per the statement recorded under section to 183 BNSS the learned counsel for the petitioner has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15658 of 2026(3) dt.11-05-2026 2/3 submitted that, although there is allegation against the petitioner to be present at the place, which was a hut situated near the railway line, this petitioner also took the victim to Durga Puja Mela, the same appears to be an improbable story. It has further been submitted that as per paragraph 35 of the case diary, the police recovered the victim from a Durga Puja Pandal inside the college, where other people, this petitioner and the victim was present. It is highly improbable that the petitioner would have exposed himself with the victim in a public place. It has further been submitted that no act of misbehavior has been attributed to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no ransom demand, etc., from the family of the informant.

It has further been submitted that there is enmity between the parties, while both are poor persons. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 02.10.2025 and, although he was accused in one another case, he has already been granted bail in the said case, which is not of a similar nature.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstance of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15658 of 2026(3) dt.11-05-2026 3/3 case, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 839 of 2025.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Praveen Kumar, J) niku/- U T