Shubham Kumar @ Shubham Kumar Thakur @ Shubham v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48016 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1216 Year-2022 Thana- BHAGALPUR KOTWALI DistrictBhagalpur ====================================================== Shubham Kumar @ Shubham Kumar Thakur @ Shubham S/o- Suman Kumar Choudhary Village- Singhiya Makanpur Ps- Naugachia Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aryan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 17-12-2025

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Bhagalpur Kotwali (Jogsar O.P.) Police Station Case No. 1216 of 2022, dated 25.12.2022, disclosing offences punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The First Information Report has been registered against unknown. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that in the night of 23.12.2022, some one has committed theft of the motorcycle of the informant, which was parked outside his house.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence in the manner alleged. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in the First Information Report.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48016 of 2025(4) dt.17-12-2025 2/2 He next submits that the name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused.

5. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned and have perused the material available on record, including the impugned order.

6. From perusal of the impugned order, it transpires that the co-accused, in his confessional statement, has disclosed the active involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. Further, the petitioner is involved in four other criminal cases of similar nature.

7. Considering the above, I do not find any reason to differ with the findings arrived at by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Bhagalpur, inasmuch as the case is under investigation, wherein the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be necessary based upon the material collected by the police during course of investigation. As such, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

8. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √