Patna High Court
Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 308(5), 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for alleged involvement in a looting incident. The FIR described unknown assailants looting cash, mobiles and firing rounds, and the petitioner was found in possession of a mobile allegedly stolen from the scene, which he claimed to have purchased without knowledge of its origin. The State opposed bail, arguing that possession indicated participation in the offence and that granting bail could enable the petitioner to abscond. The court considered the submissions and the risk of the petitioner evading investigation. Consequently, the court rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who is in possession of a stolen mobile in a looting case.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 303(2), 308(5), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- looting
- possession of stolen property
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- risk of absconding
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81449 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-448 Year-2024 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL District-
Samastipur
======================================================
Sonu Kumar Son of Dashrath Ray Resident of Village- Harpur Nizamat, P.S.-
Samastipur Muffasil, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhay Shanker Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 308(5),
303(2) and 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 as well as Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedents of two cases and the informant
alleges that 4-5 unknown accused persons came at the
construction site and looted cash, mobiles and keys of poclain
and also fired 2-3 rounds in the air.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
FIR is against unknown and the name of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81449 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/2
transpired during the course of investigation being purchaser of
one of the stolen mobiles which was looted from the place of
occurrence. It is submitted that petitioner was completely
unaware that the mobile was a looted mobile.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the anticipatory
bail application by submitting that case is of committing loot at
the place of occurrence and the petitioner was found in
possession of the mobile which was looted from the place of
occurrence and whether petitioner had purchased it or was
involved in the loot is an aspect of investigation. It is also
submitted that petitioner, in the event, if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may
abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by learned APP
for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for
grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is hereby rejected in
connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No.448 of 2024,
pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M.-II, Samastipur.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…