Kunal Singh @ KunalversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42229 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2026 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Kunal Singh @ Kunal S/o Balendra Prasad Singh @ Balendra Prasad R/O
                 vill- Ward No-01,Hemanpur, Shivai singhpur P.S- Mohiuddin Nagar, Dist-
                 Samastipur

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s

                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar Patna

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
                 For the State           :        Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
                 For the Informant       :        Mr. Awadhesh Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-07-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P

                   for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

                                 2. Learned counsel for the informant submits that he

                   has filed soft copy as well as hard copy of the vakalatnama, but

                   his name is not reflecting in the cause list. In support thereof, he

                   has produced the photo copy of the receipt of filing the

                   vakalatnama, which is hereby accepted in the court.

                                3. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 133 of 2026 lodged on

                   16.02.2026, for the offence punishable under Section 305 of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of

                   A.C.J.M-II, Patna.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42229 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

          the sole petitioner. It has been alleged by the informant that the

          petitioner entered the office premises on a holiday, switched off

          the CCTV camera, took the cash from the office, and thereafter,

          fled away from the premises.

                       5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits

          that in the FIR, a vague allegation has been made against the

          petitioner. As per the allegation, the only thing transpires is that

          the petitioner turned off the CCTV camera, but what amount

          was subject to theft, has not been described in the FIR. Counsel

          further submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is

          ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed

          upon him.

                       6. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently

          opposes the prayer for bail and submits that as per the rejection

          order passed by the Sessions Court, it become crystal clear that

          theft of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lacs) in cash and

          misappropriation of Rs. 10,20,190/- (Rupees Ten Lacs Twenty

          Thousand One Hundred Ninety) has come during investigation.

                       7. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner and submits that the Sessions Court at the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42229 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
                                                         3/3




                       time of passing order on the anticipatory bail application of the

                       petitioner has perused the case diary and materials of the case

                       diary has also been jotted down.

                                    8. As such, in the present facts and circumstances

                       considering that in the case diary, specific material has come

                       against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to

                       the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

                       petitioner stands rejected.



                                                                       (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-

U      T