Neeraj Kumar Thakur @ Dheeraj Thakur @ Dhiraj Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.756 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-698 Year-2024 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== Neeraj Kumar Thakur @ Dheeraj Thakur @ Dhiraj Thakur S/O Late Mohan Thakur R/O Village- Veena Road, Ward No. 24, P.S- Supaul, Distt.- Supaul. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026 Herad Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 698 of 2024 for the offence registered under sections 334(2), 303(2) of BNS, 2023 lodged on 24.10.2024 by the informant, Kali Mandal.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that a theft was committed in his shop which included garlic, onion and cash of Rs. 5,000/- from the drawer. On the basis of CCTV footage of the local area, accused were identified which followed the FIR. Subsequently, as the story unfolds, Burhu Kamat @ Rohit Kumar was picked up and he in the confessional statement gave the name of Arvind Kamat and this petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.756 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only because his name has come in the confession of the apprehended person, got implicated. Further, nothing has been recovered/seized from his conscious possession.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that a theft took place, the informant showed his suspicion, one person picked up and he gave the name of this petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the materials on record coupled with the fact the FIR was lodged on 24.10.2024 and belatedly, this anticipatory bail application has been filed, in that background, this Court is not inclined to extend him privilege of anticipatory bail, which is accordingly rejected.
7. However, if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks from today, the Court concerned shall take up the matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day. (Rajiv Roy, J) Vijay Singh/- U T