Himanshu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39086 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2025 Thana- KARTAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Himanshu Kumar S/o Biru Hai @ Birendra Rai Resident of Village- Gurmiya, PS- Kartahan, Distt.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-10-2025 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Sangeeta Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kartaha P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(i), 352, 351(2), 308(5), 303(2), 317(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of snatching the mobile and forcing the informant to transfer Rs. 2500/- through online mode along with other accused persons.

4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner taking this Court through the F.I.R. submitted that the mobile from which the informant was called upon does not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39086 of 2025(4) dt.15-10-2025 2/3 belong to the petitioner. So far the mobile which is said to have been snatched, the same has also been recovered from the house of co-accused Aadity Kumar, who has been extended the privilege of regular bail by the by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19552 of 2025. Moreover, this is not the allegation that the amount of Rs. 2500/- has been transferred to the petitioner's account or on his pay phone. The occurrence took place on 12.01.2025 and the F.I.R. has been instituted on the next day. There is no specific role attributed against the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes that he will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the court.

5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the petitioner has actively participated in the crime.

6. Having considered the submissions advance by the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that the snatched mobile has been recovered from the possession of co-accused, coupled with the omnibus accusation against the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39086 of 2025(4) dt.15-10-2025 3/3 receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-I, Vaishali at Hajipur. in connection with Kartaha P.S. Case No. 12 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.

(Harish Kumar, J) Nilmani/- U