Patna High Court
Raju KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court declined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS 72/2024) alleging offences under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleges that five unidentified persons on two motorcycles looted Rs 4,00,000 from an informant at gunpoint. The petitioner’s name was mentioned only in the self‑inculpatory statement of a co‑accused, Md Sadik, and he claims a clean antecedent and innocence. The State opposed the bail application, arguing the seriousness of the alleged offence. The Court, after considering the facts, declined to grant anticipatory bail, emphasizing that its observations were prima facie and limited to the bail application. The order dismissed the bail petition without prejudice to the trial proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under CrPC Section 438 in view of the allegations under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S. and the mere mention of his name in a co‑accused’s statement.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 310(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- CrPC Section 438
- Section 310
- bail application
- prima facie
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27202 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2024 Thana- DUMARIYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Raju Kumar S/o Parmeshwar Saw R/o Village - Maira, PO - Maigra, P.S -
Imamganj, District - Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned counsel for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Dumariya P.S. Case No. 72 of 2024, registered for offences
punishable under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S.
3. As per prosecution case, five unknown miscreants
riding on two motorcycles are alleged to have looted cash of Rs.
4,00,000/- from the informant on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence.
Petitioner has clean antecedent. The name of the petitioner
transpired in this case in the self inculpatory statement of one
Md. Sadik.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27202 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/2
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner, this application is dismissed.
7. It is made clear that any observation made herein is
prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.