Mukul Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Kamat v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62307 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2013 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== Mukul Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Kamat S/O Harinand Kamti @ Harinandan Kamat R/O Village- Kaluahi (Kaluwahi), P.S- Arer, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate Mr. Udeshya Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 12-11-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 365 of the Indian Penal Code and later on, Sections 364 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code were added.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that son of informant went missing since 18.05.2013.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.. Name of petitioner transpired in this case during course of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62307 of 2025(3) dt.12-11-2025 2/2 investigation merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person. Save and except confessional statement, there is no material on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in the alleged offence. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that name of petitioner transpired in this case during course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person and on his disclosure, the dead body of the abducted child was found.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, gravity of offence and materials that have surfaced during course of investigation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T