Aadarsh Kumar @ Bittu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53716 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-435 Year-2013 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== Aadarsh Kumar @ Bittu S/o Anil Singh R/o Village- Rukanpura, P.S.- Rupaspur in the district of Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Navin Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-08-2025
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 413, 414, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that Saransh and Ranjeet were apprehended with a stolen car and they disclosed the name of the petitioner and other accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is of the year 2013 and petitioner was completely unaware that he has been implicated in the instant F.I.R. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53716 of 2025(2) dt.20-08-2025 2/3 submitted that even police never made any endeavour to arrest the petitioner as such the petitioner never came to know about his implication in the instant F.I.R. It is asserted and submitted that till date no process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner but then the police on 01.10.2024 knocked the door of the petitioner and informed his family members about his implication in the instant case. It is next submitted that stolen car was not recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted that though petitioner has antecedent of one case but then the said case is also of the year 2013 and thereafter no criminal case ever came to be instituted. It is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence and will not delay the framing of charge.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53716 of 2025(2) dt.20-08-2025 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No.435/2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C
7. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is delaying the trial, in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
8. It is also made clear that in the event if process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner, in that event, the present anticipatory bail order shall not be given effect to.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T