Niraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80409 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-108 Year-2025 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Niraj Kumar Son of Gagandev Ram Resident of Village - Matiyariya Kashwa, P.S. - Harsidhi, District - East Champaran, Motihari. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhandev Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-12-2025

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.108/2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 25(1-B) (a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that he received secret information that loot committed on 10.02.2025 was committed by Vishal, who worked as a liner, accordingly, house of Vishal was raided and he was arrested and disclosed that the occurrence of 10.02.2025 was committed by him along with petitioner and Birendra and the looted articles can be recovered from the house of the petitioner, thereafter the force along with Vishal came to the house of Birendra, who was arrested, thereafter house of petitioner was raided but he was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80409 of 2025(2) dt.10-12-2025 2/2 found absconding and apprehended accused disclosed that they have seen where the petitioner has concealed the looted arms, cartridges and money, thereafter at the instance of apprehended accused, the house of the petitioner was raided and a country made pistol along with two live cartridges and Rs.5000/- was recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is also submitted that raid was conducted behind his back as such it appears that the looted articles were planted in his house.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the looted articles have been recovered from the house of the petitioner at the instance of the apprehended accused and investigation of the case is in its nascent stages

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