Aman Kumar @ Kargil v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65187 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2025 Thana- VAINI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Aman Kumar @ Kargil S/o Ramai Thakur Resident of Village - Repura, P.S - Waini, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anish Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-10-2025

1. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. N.K. Agrawal and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Waini P.S. Case No.38/2025 dated 27.05.2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B)A, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of four cases and the informant alleges that he got information that petitioner is going towards his house firing, accordingly, he reached the place of occurrence, when he saw three accused on a motorcycle and when they were asked to stop, petitioner jumped and fled, while Vivekanand and Hemant were apprehended and one countrymade pistol along with one live cartridge and two empty

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65187 of 2025(3) dt.15-10-2025 2/3 cartridges were seized along with the motorcycle and mobile and apprehended accused disclosed that arms and cartridges belonged to the petitioner.

4. Learned Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that it does not appear probable that informant on receiving secret information would have reached the place of occurrence and would have even seen the petitioner jumping from the motorcycle and fleeing. It is submitted that the informant apprehended Vivekanand and Hemant and made them confess the name of the petitioner. It is also submitted that though apprehended accused confessed the name of the petitioner but then arms and cartridges were recovered from their possession. It is also submitted that confessional statement in police custody does not have any evidentiary value.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that no doubt the petitioner was not arrested from the place of occurrence but his name transpired in the confessional statement of apprehended accused. It is further submitted that petitioner carries antecedent of four cases and investigation is continuing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65187 of 2025(3) dt.15-10-2025 3/3 and if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.

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

7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T