Bittu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6724 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-452 Year-2025 Thana- MAHARAJGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Bittu Kumar Yadav S/o Lal Babu Yadav R/o Village- Mahuwari, P.SMaharajganj, Dist- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 452 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 310(4), 310(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that Police received secret information that petitioner along with other accused persons are preparing to commit dacoity. In the meanwhile, Police personnel reached there and apprehended some miscreants. On search, country made pistol and live cartridges were seized.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. The

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6724 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/2 name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of inimical terms with co-accused. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. The apprehended persons disclosed the name of petitioner, who managed to escape from the place of occurrence.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of offences, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

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

8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T