Patna High CourtCR. MISC./56886/2025bail rejected

Om Prakash Kumar @ Om Prakash Kumar Yadav @ Bhura Yadav @ Bhura v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-27Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56886 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2024 Thana- NAVINAGAR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Om Prakash Kumar @ Om Prakash Kumar Yadav @ Bhura Yadav @ Bhura S/o Vinod Yadav R/o Village- Jasoiya, P.S.- Narari Kala Khurd, DistrictAurangabad (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Murli Dhar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Navinagar P.S. Case No. 103 of 2024 instituted under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 29.03.2024 by the informant, Sushil Kumar Chauhan.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his Pulsar Motorcycle went missing from the door and later he found that the battery of the tractor has also been taken away by the accused persons. This led to the FIR.

4. The role of the petitioner has cropped up.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only because of criminal antecedent, he has been implicated.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56886 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/2

6. Learned APP on the other hand opposes the prayer submitting that his role has come in the confessional statement of co-accused Akshay Kumar.

7. In that background, there is no reason to ignore criminal antecedent part which has been recorded in para-3 and the same are under section 379 of the IPC in which the present case has also been lodged.

8. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the fact that this petitioner has criminal antecedent of the same nature, it would be appropriate that he seek bail.

9. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T