Jitu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18846 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-441 Year-2024 Thana- DIDARGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Jitu Kumar S/o Late Pappu Prasad R/o Village - Kothiya, P.S - Didarganj,
                 District - Patna

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Jay Ram Prasad
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   25-03-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 37 and 45

                   of Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act and Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 125, 132 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that he received an information that accused Vivek

                   Bhushan in an intoxicated condition was creating ruckus at

                   village Kothiya, Patna and was also assaulting passerby

                   accordingly the police reached the place of occurrence and

                   apprehended Vivek but then 20-30 unknown accused came and

                   tried to free him and even pelted stones at the force.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18846 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is next submitted that Vivek was apprehended and

          is in judicial custody. It is next submitted that petitioner is a

          resident of a place where the occurrence took place, as such,

          when police force came, out of the inquisitiveness, he also came

          to the place of occurrence to witness the occurrence when he

          came to be implicated based on confessional statement of Vivek

          in police custody which does not have any evidentiary value.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

          event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks

          from today, be released on provisional anticipatory bail on

          furnishing bail bonds of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred) with

          two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

          learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in

          connection with Didarganj P.S. Case No.441/2024, subject to

          the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the

          B.N.S.S.

                       7. It is made clear that the learned trial court thereafter
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18846 of 2026(2) dt.25-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       shall verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioner and in the

                       event if it is found that petitioner has antecedent of even one

                       case, in that event, it would be presumed that petitioner had

                       concealed his antecedent before this court, as such, the

                       provisional anticipatory bail order shall not be confirmed but if

                       on verification it is found that petitioner is a person with clean

                       antecedent, in that event the provisional anticipatory bail order

                       shall be confirmed forthwith.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T