Amrendra Kumar Roy @ Bhola Rai @ Bhola Ray @ Arvind Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38097 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2024 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Amrendra Kumar Roy @ Bhola Rai @ Bhola Ray @ Arvind Rai S/o- Late Shatrudhan Ray @ Late Shatrudhan Roy @ Late Shatrudhan Prasad Ray Resident of Village-Nikaspur PS- Tajpur District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-08-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 76, 352, 351(2) and 303(2) of the BNS, 2023.

3. The learned APP for the State, at the outset, submits that the offences for which the instant FIR has been instituted carries punishment of seven years and less. It is further submitted that law is well settled that for offences which carries punishment of seven years and less in such cases, arrest is not automatic, rather the police has to resort to a procedure as envisaged under Section 35 of the BNSS. It is further submitted that from pleadings made in the anticipatory bail application, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38097 of 2025(3) dt.21-08-2025 2/2 cannot be culled out that petitioner has any apprehension of arrest. It is further submitted that in such cases where an FIR is instituted with respect to offence which carries punishment of seven years and less, the police first has to issue notice under Section 35 BNSS, thereafter only the petitioner can approach a Court of competent jurisdiction seeking anticipatory bail based on apprehension, if the same is culled out from the facts of the case.

4. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with liberty to an application before the concerned Superintendent of Police in terms of Section 35 BNSS.

5. Permission is accorded.

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T