Saket Kumar @ Chhotu v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36325 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2025 Thana- LAUHIYANAGAR District- Begusarai ====================================================== Saket Kumar @ Chhotu Son of Lalan Kuwar @ Lalan Kumar R/o Village - Saidpur, P.S.- Gopalpur, District - Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Namita Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Anshu Dhar Sharma, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 05-06-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The present Criminal Miscellaneous application has been filed under Sections 483 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "the BNSS") for seeking regular bail in connection with Lohiyanagar P.S. Case No.07 of 2025 lodged on 07.01.2025 under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 pending in the Court of C.J.M., Begusarai.

3. As per the prosecution, the F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown accused persons against whom there is allegation of theft of motorcycle.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has figured in this case at the instance of police as there are four

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36325 of 2025(2) dt.05-06-2025 2/2 criminal case pending against him and he is in bail in all cases. He further submits that there is no eye witness of the said occurrence.

5. Learned Counsel further submits that petitioner is in custody since 03.03.2025 having four criminal antecedent.

6. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the rejection order indicates that the stolen property has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner and his antecedent is not clean. There are four criminal cases relating to theft, robbery, etc., pending against him.

7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected, but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T