Sanjiv Kumar @ Vatkhari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45367 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2023 Thana- SHEOHAR District- Sheohar ====================================================== Sanjiv Kumar @ Vatkhari S/o Shambhu Sahni Resident of Village - Sahpur Sahni Tola Ward No. 8, P.S- Sheohar, District - Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 457 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that two accused persons on 03.06.2023, in the night, entreed his house and he heard someone opening a box, accordingly, he woke up and went in the room and saw petitioner and an unknown accused opening the box. The accused dashsed the informant and fled away with Rs.85,000/- which he had kept for constructing his house and had also taken a loan of Rs.35,000/- from Sonata Bank on 03.06.2023 itself.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45367 of 2026(2) dt.13-07-2026 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to passage. It is further submitted that petitioner and the informant are neighbour and they are having dispute relating to passage, as such, the instant false case came to be instituted when petitioner on the date of occurrence was in Punjab.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if petitioner and the informant were neighbour and petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence on the date of occurrence and was in Punjab then it does not appear probable that informant would have implicated him. It is further submitted that though plea of alibi has been taken by the petitioner but then the petitioner in the anticipatory bail application has not disclosed that in Punjab where he was working and staying which amply demonstrates that plea of alibi has been taken only for seeking anticipatory bail. It is next submitted that investigation of the case is continuing.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Sheohar P.S. Case No. 124 of 2023 pending in the Court of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45367 of 2026(2) dt.13-07-2026 3/3 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheohar/Successor Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T