Divyanshu Kumar @ Divyanshu Kumar Sharma @ Dibyanshu Kumar Sharma @ Divyanshu Kr. Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58263 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-534 Year-2022 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna ====================================================== Divyanshu Kumar @ Divyanshu Kumar Sharma @ Dibyanshu Kumar Sharma @ Divyanshu Kr. Sharma S/o- Krishnadhar Singh Village- Kab POKab PS-Rani Talab District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

The Union of India Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shiw Kumar Prabhakar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP Mr. Deepak Kumar, CGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-11-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Phulwarisharif PS Case No. 534 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC, Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 and 35 of Arms Act as well as Sections 8(c) and 21(b) of NDPS Act.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of three cases, but then he was acquitted in one case and the informant alleges that 33.75 gram of smack along with a country-made pistol and three live cartridges were recovered from possession of six accused persons, as recorded in the FIR.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58263 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/2 4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner was not apprehended from the spot as such nothing was recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be implicated based on the confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody, which does not have any elementary value.

5.

The learned APP opposes anticipatory bail application and submits that allegation is of recovery of 33.75 gram of smack from six different accused whose names are recorded in the FIR and the apprehended accused disclosed the name of the petitioner, it is further submitted that petitioner has criminal antecedent and in the event if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond, it is also submitted that the investigation of the case is in its nascent stages.

6.

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

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T