Patna High CourtCR. MISC./996/2025dismissed

Rahul Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-02-07Mr. Justice Anjani Kumar Sharan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.996 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2023 Thana- DHANARUA District- Patna ====================================================== Rahul Kumar S/O Vidanand Prasad R/O Village- Sewdaha Bigha, P.S.- Dhanarua, Dist.- Patna, Bihar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 07-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 302, 307, 147, 149, 341, 323, 120(B) of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 21.12.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 80530 of 2023.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed second anticipatory bail application on the ground that some of the co-accused persons has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is quite innocent and have committed no offence. No such occurrence

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.996 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 2/2 as alleged has ever taken place. Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the fact that earlier the anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) kiran/- U T