IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42931 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2019 Thana- BAKHTIYARPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Binit Kumar @ Harsh Raj S/o Chandra Shekhar Prasad Singh R/v Muhalla - New byepass raghopur bhakhityarpur, P.s.- Bhakhityarpur, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Sujata Sinha, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ravindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 16-07-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State Mr. Ravindra Kumar. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bakhtiyarpur P.S. Case No.285/2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases and the informant alleges that 5-6 unknown miscreants looted the goods which the informant was carrying on his truck in the night near Mamta Hotel, Bakhtiyarpur. 4. The learned counsel submits that the FIR was instituted against unknown and the name of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of Vicky. It is next submitted that Vicky is a neighbour of the petitioner and earlier Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42931 of 2025(2) dt.16-07-2025 2/2 also had implicated him in two false cases which are antecedent of the petitioner but then the petitioner was granted the privilege of being juvenile. It is also submitted that since FIR was against unknown as such petitioner was completely unaware that he has again been falsely implicated in the instant case at the behest of Vicky. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the case is of the year 2019, the anticipatory bail application has been filed in the year 2025 before the learned District Court and thereafter before this Court. It is also submitted that it is a case of road robbery and the investigation in the case against the petitioner is still continuing, as such, if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond. 6. Considering the submission made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is rejected. amit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T