Patna High CourtCR. MISC./17658/2026dismissed

Bikky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar @ Vikki Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-23Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17658 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-266 Year-2025 Thana- KATIHAR MUFFASIL District- Katihar ====================================================== Bikky Kumar @ Vicky Kumar @ Vikki Kumar S/o Manoj Sah R/o Bhorabari, P.S.- Muffasil, Distt.- Katihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Renuka Ratnakar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 266/2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 309(6) of B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, unknown persons looted a toto.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. The name of the petitioner and other accused persons have come during investigation. Learned counsel further submits that he has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 14.11.2025. The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial. It is lastly submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the matter

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17658 of 2026(5) dt.23-06-2026 2/2 has been compromised and therefore, the petitioner deserves bail.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner on the ground that four batteries of toto have been recovered from the house of the petitioner and the looted toto has been recovered from the statement of the petitioner.

6. Considering the recovery and the fact that the petitioner is tampering with the evidence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T