Dilip Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37982 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2026 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Dilip Kumar S/o Yogendra Paswan R/o Village - Sri Ram Colony, Bhagwanpur, P.S. - Sadar, Dist. - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Manjeet Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Vinod Shanker Modi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No.265 of 2026 under Sections 334(1) and 303(2) of the BNS, 2023 pending before the court of C.J.M.,Muzaffarpur.

3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against 8-10 unknown accused persons excluding the petitioner against whom there is allegation of theft of total 51 Aluminum plates amounting to Rs.6,00,000/- and entire event has been recorded in the CCTV of the informant.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37982 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/3 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR rather his name has figured in this case during investigation at the instance of police and it has been alleged that staff of the petitioner has purchased the said stolen aluminum plates.

5. Learned Counsel also submits that antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he is owner of the Jagdamba Metal Shop in which some labourer used to work and the said theft material has come in his shop only at the instance of the said labourer. He further submits that the petitioner is not involved and he is completely unaware about the said event.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and fairly submits that the material has come in the case diary which has been well discussed in paragraph 5 of the rejection order passed by Additional Sessions Judge-13, Muzaffarpur.

7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, therefore the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

8. However, Trial Court is directed to consider the regular bail application of the petitioner, if he surrenders within four weeks from today and prays for regular bail, then trial court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37982 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 3/3 shall pass order on merit without being prejudice of the present order preferably on the same day.

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