IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64358 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2025 Thana- DIDARGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Navin Kumar @ Navin Ray S/o Shankar Ray Resident of Village- Nihalpur, P.S.- Rampurhari, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 16-09-2025 Heard Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 318(3), 336(3), 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.. 3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that informant is in the business of transportation, which is in the name Adarsh Raj Road Lines. It is alleged that on 11.04.2025, informant, on the guarantee of co-accused Dilshad, who also owns a transport company by thename of ATC Transports, Shamli, U.P., got the goods loaded from Gowardhan Ispat Pvt. Ltd. on a truck bearing Registration No. HR-45-B-4845 for delivery at Jaiswal Steel, Gorakhpur and Sri Balaji Steel, Gorakhpur. Owner and driver of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64358 of 2025(2) dt.16-09-2025 2/3 the truck is co-accused Arshad and he was accompanied by co- accused Eklas. However, on 14.04.2025, informant came to know that goods have yet not been delivered. Thereafter, informant tried contacting the F.I.R. named accused persons but they kept on making excuses. Informant suspects that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, in a planned conspiracy, have embezzled the goods. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioners is not named in the F.I.R.. Name of petitioner transpired in this case during course of investigation and no stolen article were recovered from possession of this petitioner. 5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that during course of investigation it has come that huge quantity of steel, which was supposed to be delivered at Gorakhpur by a truck, were taken to Muzaffarpur where it was handed over to this petitioner and thereafter, this petitioner sold the same at Sitamarhi. Thus, this petitioner, in a planned conspiracy with other co-accused persons, stole the goods and sold them. Petitioner has got three criminal Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64358 of 2025(2) dt.16-09-2025 3/3 antecedents. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation, materials that have surfaced during course of investigation and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. shashank/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T