Patna High Court
Ankit Kumar @ Aditya KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the case not fit for such relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Ankit Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a theft case (Section 379 IPC) concerning a vehicle. The prosecution alleged his involvement, citing a self‑inculpatory statement of a co‑accused. The petitioner claimed innocence and a clean record. The State opposed the bail on the basis of the co‑accused’s statement. The Patna High Court held that the circumstances did not warrant anticipatory bail, dismissed the application, and directed the petitioner to surrender within two weeks and apply for regular bail, failing which the police would arrest him.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the theft case.
- Whether the self‑inculpatory statement of a co‑accused makes the case fit for anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- theft
- Section 379 IPC
- criminal procedure
- bail
- self‑inculpatory statement
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88603 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2024 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ankit Kumar @ Aditya Kumar S/o- Vishwanath Singh @ Bisho Mahto
Village - Kalyanpur , Police Station - Kalyanpur , District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mahendra Pratap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 27-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection
with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 105 of 2024 instituted under
Section 379 of I.P.C.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner is accused
of committing theft of a vehicle
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has not stolen anything. Petitioner has clean
antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner on the ground that the
name of the petitioner has come in the self-inculpatory
statement of the co-accused.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88603 of 2025(3) dt.27-02-2026
2/2
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, this is not a fit
case for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
8. The petitioner is directed to surrender within two
weeks from today and pray for regular bail, failing which the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur will take all steps for
arrest of the petitioner.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur through FAX or e-mail for
its compliance.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…