Patna High Court
Ravi KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Ravi Kumar was arrested on 25 January 2026 in connection with a case involving alleged possession of large quantities of petrol, diesel and related equipment recovered from a hut. The prosecution alleged offences under Sections 287, 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1955 and Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The petitioner contended that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated, was not the absolute owner of the hut and that Section 103 of the BNSS had not been complied with. The court examined these submissions, noted the lack of direct possession by the petitioner and the procedural lapse, and held that bail could be granted. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court and no tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the BNSS, Explosive Substances Act and Essential Commodities Act.
- Whether the non‑compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of absolute ownership of the hut from which the explosives were recovered affects the bail decision.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent justifies granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 287, 316(2), 318(4), 3(5)
- Essential Commodities Act, 1955 — s. 7
- Explosive Substances Act, 1955 — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- non‑compliance of Section 103
- clean antecedent
- property ownership
- explosive substances
- essential commodities
- BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24158 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2026 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ravi Kumar Son of Shri Bhagwan Prasad @ Bhagwan Parsad R/o Village -
Vishambharpur, P.S. - Kalyanpur, Dist. - East Champaran.... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-04-2026 Heard Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
25.01.2026 in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 36 of
2026, F.I.R. dated 24.01.2026 for the offences punishable under
Sections 287, 316(2), 318(4) 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita,
2023 and Section 3 and 4 of Explosive Substance Act, 1955 and
Section 7 of Essential Commodities Act, 1955.
3. According to prosecution case, on secret information
when the police reached the place of occurrence, they saw two
persons running away. The police tried to caught them but one of
them escaped. The apprehended person disclosed him as the
petitioner. On search, the police recovered 9 tin drums, in which
liquids like petrol with total quantity of 1980 litre were kept there.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24158 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
2/3
One drum diesel type liquids a total of 220 L were kept and four
unfilled drums which smell like petrol were found and a tin
measuring aluminum equipment of lire with a plastic pump were
also found.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated
in the present case. It appears from the FIR that nothing has been
recovered from conscious possession of the petitioner rather the
recovery has been made from the hut in question and petitioner is
not absolute owner of the said hut rather the hut belongs to the joint
possession property of the petitioner's family. He next submits that
there is non-compliance of Section 103 of BNSS and the petitioner
is in custody since 25.01.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and there is non-compliance of
Section 103 of BNSS and petitioner is not absolute owner of the
hut in question, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, East Champaran, Motihari in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24158 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
3/3
connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 36 of 2026, subject to the
following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and
shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his
absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his
bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it
is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent,
the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the
name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.