Patna High Court
Radheshyam Kumar @ Radheyshayam SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court denied the petitioner's anticipatory bail application.
Summary
The petitioner, Radheshyam Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a bike‑theft case (Barun P.S. Case No.202/2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 317(4), 317(5), 336(3), 340(2) and 318(4) of the B.N.S., 2023. He contended that he has a clean record and was falsely implicated based on a chain of hearsay statements from an informant and a confession of an accused in police custody, which he argued lacks evidentiary value. He further pointed out that the alleged owner of the bike, Ranvijay, was not produced by police and that an affidavit (Annexure‑2) showed the bike had been sold to another person. The State opposed bail, asserting that a gang was operating, that a motorcycle cannot be transferred by affidavit, and that a proper investigation was required to establish the truth. The Court, after considering the State’s submissions, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the petitioner’s grounds insufficient.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of the bike‑theft case.
- Whether the evidence presented by the petitioner, including hearsay and an affidavit, is sufficient to justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 317(4), 317(5), 318(4), 336(3), 340(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bike theft
- false implication
- evidentiary value
- investigation
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18748 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-262 Year-2025 Thana- BARUN District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Radheshyam Kumar @ Radheyshayam Singh S/O Late Ram Naresh Singh
R/O Village- Krishnapur, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Birendra Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Barun P.S. Case No.202/2025, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 317(4), 317(5), 336(3), 340(2) and
318(4) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that Ajit was apprehended with a stolen bike and he
disclosed that he had purchased the bike from Bittu, further
Bittu disclosed that he had purchased the bike from Ranjan and
Ranjan disclosed that he had purchased the bike from petitioner
and it was found that owner of the bike was Ranvijay and when
Ranvijay was contacted, he disclosed that his registered bike is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18748 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
with him, thus alleges that a gang is operating using the details
of Ranvijay’s bike by punching the details in some other bike.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant based on confession of apprehended accused in police
custody which does not have any evidentiary value. It is next
submitted that though in the FIR, it is alleged that Ranvijay
disclosed that his registered bike is with him but then the police
never asked Ranvijay to produce the said bike. It is also
submitted that Annexure-2 has been annexed in the anticipatory
bail application which is an affidavit showing that Ranvijay had
sold his bike to Sarvjeet.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that in the nature
of allegation as alleged, it appears that a gang is operating which
indulges in committing theft of bike. It is next submitted that a
motorcycle cannot be transferred to a third person by way of
affidavit. It is next submitted that if what has been submitted by
the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is true,
the same would transpired in the investigation and police will
submit a final form but then investigation and questioning of the
accused is required to establish the truth. It is also submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18748 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
no averment has been made by the petitioner in the anticipatory
bail application establishing the bonafide of the petitioner with
regard to his profession.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…