Allowed¶18

Anil Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Apr 2025CR. MISC./1563/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Crl. Misc. No.1563 of 2025, decided 23-04-2025 by Justice Soni Shrivastava: anticipatory bail allowed in PS Case No. 100 of 2024 (Pratapganj, Supaul) under Sections 394, 307 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act; name surfaced via co-accused Nitesh Kumar's confessional statement (CD para 16) showing 'liner' role; bond Rs.10,000 with two like sureties, subject to S.438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions; no precedents cited.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed: petitioner to be enlarged on bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, on bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C., in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024. ¶18

Anil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 394, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, is entitled to anticipatory bail. +1 more

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Anticipatory bail granted: the petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within four weeks, is to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/-.

¶18

Key takeaways

The enlargement is tied to the pending Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024 (or successor court) and is made subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.; two sureties of the like amount are required.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail (Section 438 Cr.P.C.) granted to Anil Kumar in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024 (District Supaul), registered under Sections 394, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, arising out of an armed snatching of Rs. 25,290/-, a mobile and a bluetooth device from the informant by unknown criminals on two motorcycles. The petitioner's name transpired during investigation from the confessional statement of apprehended accused Nitesh Kumar (recorded at paragraph-16 of the case diary), in which he was shown to have done the work of a 'liner'. Overruling the State's objection that the petitioner is an accused in one more case (wherein, per counsel, he is on bail), the Court directed enlargement on bail upon arrest or surrender within four weeks, on a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1563 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2024 Thana- PRATAPGANJ District- Supaul

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Anil Kumar S/o Arjun Mehta Resident of Village- Kolhua, P.S.- Shankarpur, Distrit- Madhepura

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kamal Kishore Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 23-04-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶12

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 394, 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶13

The FIR has been lodged against unknown criminals who came on two motorcycles and snatched Rs. 25,290/-, one mobile and one blue tooth from the informant on gun point.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would be apparent from the First Information Report that the same has been lodged against unknown and the only suspicion in the FIR has been raised against one Mithilesh. Subsequently, the name of the petitioner has transpired during the course of investigation in the confessional statement of one apprehended accused Nitesh Kumar whose confessional statement has been

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1563 of 2025(3) dt.23-04-2025 2/2

¶16

recorded in paragraph-16 of the case diary. Even upon consideration of the confessional statement, it would appear that the petitioner did the work of a liner and he was not amongst one of the four persons who had committed the actual occurrence.

¶17

Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for anticipatory bail, besides others, on the ground that the petitioner is an accused in one more case to which learned counsel for the petitioner responds by stating that the petitioner is on bail in the said case.

¶18

Considering all the above mentioned facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶19

devendra/- U T

¶20

(Soni Shrivastava, J)

Anil Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Dhiraj Kumar @ Dhiraj Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Kasim Vs The State of Bihar

Law Kush Yadav @ Lawkush Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Rudal Bind Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Noor @ Md. Enul Vs The State of Bihar