IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38055 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Kundan Kumar S/o Wakil Ray R/o village- Madhopur Hazari, PS- Sahebganj, District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Bela Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 2 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025, dated 22.04.2025, lodged under Sections 303(2), 313, 317(4) & 317(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”), Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 & 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 8(c) & 21(b) of the N.D.P.S. Act, pending before the Court of Principal Sessions Judge, Gopalganj. 3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against four named accused persons, including the present petitioner. A total recovery of 14.67 grams of brown-coloured smack-like narcotic substance, one country-made katta along with one live cartridge, one toy gun made of steel, and four white-coloured Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38055 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/2 gallons, out of which two gallons were filled with 80 litres of diesel-like flammable substance, has been made, which are the subject matters of the present case. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has no concern with the seized vehicle. Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedents of the petitioner are not clean, as five criminal cases are pending against him. 5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that five criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. Aman Kumar/- (Dr. Anshuman, J.) U T