Deepak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80713 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-109 Year-2025 Thana- SHEIKHOPUR SARAI DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== Deepak Kumar, aged about 21 years, (Male), Son of Nawal Ram @ Naval Ram, resident of village - Ambari, P.S - Shekhopur Sarai, District- Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Fahimuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 305 and 331(4) of the BNS.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, the informant put his Vivo T3x mobile phone and Samsung Galaxy Tab !9+ on charge and after that he went to sleep and when he woke up, he found that his mobile phone and tablet was stolen from his room and thereafter he informant his family members about the incident.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80713 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 figured only on the basis of confessional statement of coaccused Gautam Kumar due to local enmity and politics. Petitioner has got three criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner is named in the FIR, he has got three criminal antecedent and if granting bail to the petitioner, then the trial of the petitioner shall affect the present case.

6. On perusal of the first information report, case diary and impugned order dated 03.11.2025, it appears that petitioner is named in the FIR and his name transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Gautam Kumar, police found the allegation is true in the supervision note and investigation is still pending, so I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T