Patna High Court
Bhushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Bhushan Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the B.N.S. He asserted that he was not named in the FIR, that his name only surfaced during investigation, and that the FIR was lodged after an unexplained seven‑day delay, making the prosecution’s case doubtful. He also highlighted his clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail, contending that stolen iron plates were recovered from a tractor (registration No. BR43GA5521) of which the petitioner was the driver, and that he fled the scene. The Court examined the specific nature of the accusations, the material evidence recovered, and the circumstances of the investigation. Concluding that the prosecution’s material was substantive and the petitioner’s involvement plausible, the Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the B.N.S. given the facts of the case.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 303(2), 317(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR delay
- theft
- driver
- criminal procedure
- Section 303
- Section 317
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10411 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2025 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Bhushan Kumar Son of Late Subhaki Yadav Resident of Village- Ketawan
Kataiya, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Ms. Pooja Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 Heard Ms. Pooja Prasad, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned
APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2) and
317(2) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named
accused persons, along with some unknown persons, committed
theft of iron plates from the plant of informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R..
Name of petitioner transpired in this case during investigation.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10411 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/2
Moreover, the present F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate
delay of 7 days and there is no plausible explanation for the
same which itself makes the entire prosecution case doubtful.
Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that during investigation, all the
stolen articles were recovered from a tractor bearing
Registration No. BR43GA5521 and this petitioner is driver of
the said tractor and he left the tractor and fled away from the
spot.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, specific and direct nature of accusation and materials that
have surfaced during investigation, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.