Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44407 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-514 Year-2020 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Sandeep Kumar @ Sandeep S/o Umesh Sah R/o Village- Halimpur, P.ORajwara, P.S- Sahebganj, Dist- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sagar Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026

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 399, 402, 413 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that secret information was received that miscreants were planning to commit offence of dacoity, accordingly the place of occurrence was raided on 01.10.2020 at 6:20 PM and five accused were arrested and others succeeded in fleeing away, further arms and cartridges were recovered from Sachin and Md. Ashik and the stolen motorcycle was recovered from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44407 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 2/3 Md. Asgar and the apprehended accused disclosed their name as well as name of the petitioners who fled.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, it is further submitted that petitioner was not apprehended from the place of occurrence and his name transpired in the confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits that the case is of the year 2020 and petitioner is named in the FIR though his name transpired based on disclosure made by the apprehended accused at the place of occurrence from where arms and cartridges along with stolen motorcycle was recovered. It is next submitted that the petitioner in the instant anticipatory bail application has not disclosed what he does for earning a living. It is further submitted that case is of the year 2020 and the anticipatory bail application has been filed in 2026 and investigation in the case against the petitioner is continuing.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44407 of 2026(2) dt.21-07-2026 3/3

7. Accordingly, the instant application stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) rajesh/- U T