Ankul Kumar @ Anko Kumar @ Anukul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82898 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2025 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna ====================================================== Ankul Kumar @ Anko Kumar @ Anukul Kumar S/o- Raj Kumar Singh VillAchuara, P.s- Barh, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-12-2025 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Zainul Abedin, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No. 98 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 303(2), 318(4), 308(2), 352, 61(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 Sections 341, 342, 323, 379, 420, 384, 504, 120(b), 34 and 66 of the I.T. Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant contacted one Amit Kumar on the advice of Avinash Srivastava that Amit Kumar can arrange him employment in a bank. It is further alleged that Amit Kumar called him to Pandarak; one man was there to receive him. That man took him to the fields; after some time, Amit Kumar and seven others arrived there,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82898 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 2/3 made him keep quiet, and started assaulting him with the butt of a pistol and rifle. It is further alleged that they snatched his mobile, ATM card, PAN card, driving license, and credit card and forced him to disclose the ATM pin. It is alleged that from his account they also took Rs. 25,000/-; they withdrew Rs. 4,00,000/- from ATM and other transactions were made from his UPI.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the name of this petitioner is not there in the FIR; rather, his name has surfaced during the course of investigation. During the course of the investigation, one coaccused, namely Amit, has named this petitioner. He also submits that from perusal of this petitioner, only two mobiles were recovered. From perusal of the order of the learned trial court, it is clear that two mobiles were recovered from this petitioner, and one iPhone belongs to Shubham Kumar. Shubham Kumar is not the informant in this case. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.06.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82898 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 3/3 antecedent of two cases.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., 1st Class, Barh, Dist: Patna in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No. 98 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T