Patna High CourtCR. MISC./53597/2025bail rejected

Mantu Singh @ Mantu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-08Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53597 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2025 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna ====================================================== Mantu Singh @ Mantu Kumar S/o Sanjeet Ray R/o village- Kothawan, P.S - Khagaul, District - Patna, Bihar - 801105 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, Sr. Advocate Mr. Manu Tripurari, Advocate Mr. Apurv Harsh, Advocate Mr. Pranshu Prakash, Advocate Ms. Jaya Singh, Advocate Mr. Raghu Raj Singh, Advocate Mr. Arya Achint, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025

1. Heard Mrs. Nivedita Nirvikar, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the instant anticipatory bail application has been filed by the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 171 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 111(4), 111(6) and 111(7) of the BNS, 2023.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that petitioner has also approached this Court by filing quashing application being Cr. Misc. No. 59962 of 2025. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53597 of 2025(3) dt.08-10-2025 2/2 case was taken up on 09.09.2025 and it was recorded that no coercive step shall be taken against the petitioner.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that since the petitioner has been granted no coercive action, as such, the petitioner, for the present, does not have any apprehension of arrest.

5. The Court is in complete agreement with the submission of the learned A.P.P. for the State. As such, the Court in not inclined to proceed with the anticipatory bail application.

6. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

7. However, the same will not denude the petitioner of approaching the Court afresh if Cr. Misc. No. 59962 of 2025 is dismissed subsequently.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T