Bittu Kumar @ Bittu Prakash v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67229 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2023 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Bittu Kumar @ Bittu Prakash S/O Shiv Kumar Yadav R/O Dhawahi, P.S.- Harsidhi, District- East Champaran, Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-10-2025

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

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Harsidhi P.S. Case No.299/2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 402, 413, 414 of the Indian Penal Code & Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of four cases and the informant alleges that an information was received that criminals have gathered with an intent to look a businessman, accordingly he reached the place of occurrence and six accused were apprehended and from apprehended accused, pistol, live cartridges and mobile were recovered, as detailed in the FIR and they disclosed the name of petitioner and Umesh, who fled from the place of occurrence.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67229 of 2025(2) dt.09-10-2025 2/2 petitioner was not arrested from the spot and his name transpired in the confessional statement of apprehended accused in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that since petitioner has antecedent, as such informant got him implicated through the apprehended accused persons.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that allegations are serious that police had received information that criminals have gathered to loot a businessman and accordingly had reached the place of occurrence and six accused were apprehended from whom pistol and live cartridges were recovered and it was on their disclosure that name of petitioner transpired 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