IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25541 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-81 Year-2016 Thana- RAJEPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ashok Ram, S/o Jay Mangal Ram, Resident of Village- Kothiya, P.S.- Gadhahiya (Madhuban), District- East Champaran, Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhandev Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 2 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Rajepur P.S. Case No. 81 of 2016 in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149, 151, 152, 153(A), 160, 295, 295(A), 297, 298, 395, 341, 342, 323 and 504 of the IPC. 3. As per prosecution case, allegation against two named accused persons and 350-400 unknown persons including the petitioner of assaulting and looting the articles from the shop of informant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the first information report and the same was lodged against two named persons and 250-400 Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25541 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026 2/2 unknown persons. The name of the petitioner is said to have transpired during course of investigation on the basis of statement made by local chowkidar. It is further submitted that no looted articles have been recovered from personal or conscious possession of the petitioner and the named accused persons have already been granted regular bail. 5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for anticipatory bail on the ground that the FIR is of the year 2016 and the petitioner carries 7 criminal antecedents. 6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that the petitioner has 7 criminal antecedents and the case is of the year 2016, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. khushbu/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T