Patna High Court

Sudhakar Kumar @ SurtumversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court held that bail must be granted to the petitioner in the robbery case under Section 392 IPC.

Summary

Sudhakar Kumar applied for bail in a robbery case (Section 392 IPC) arising from an alleged forced entry, assault, and theft of Rs.85,000 from Mata Di Brick Industry. The prosecution alleged that three persons committed the offence, while the petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and his name surfaced only through a co-accused’s confessional statement in a separate case. No incriminating article was recovered from the petitioner’s possession and no third‑information‑report had been conducted to establish his involvement. The petitioner had been in custody since 23 March 2023 and possessed one prior criminal antecedent. After considering the lack of direct evidence, the false implication claim, and the length of custody, the Court granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and conditions of appearance.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the alleged robbery under Section 392 IPC.
Whether the petitioner’s alleged false implication and lack of direct evidence warrant bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 392

Subjects

bail
false implication
robbery
Section 392 IPC
criminal procedure
custody
sureties

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10090 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-42 Year-2022 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Sudhakar Kumar @ Surtum S/O Jaynarayan Verma Resident of village-
                 Chadra Nagar (Ranko) P.S.- Muffasil District- Khagaria

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Chandan Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Alauli

                   P.S. Case No. 42 of 2022 instituted for the offences under

                   Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that three persons

                   forcibly entered the office of Mata Di Brick Industry at night,

                   assaulted the informant and looted ₹85,000/- from the locker

                   along with CCTV footage and Wi-Fi SIM Card.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

                   Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner

                   transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10090 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
                                            2/3




          the co-accused recorded in Alauli P.S. Case No. 35 of 2023. No

          incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious

          possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted

          that T.I.P. has not been conducted till date to ascertain the

          involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. Learned

          counsel further submitted that petitioner has got no concern with

          the looted articles. Learned counsel further submitted that

          charge has been framed against the petitioner and one witness

          has also been examined. It has been submitted on behalf of the

          petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2023 and

          has one criminal antecedent.

                      5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the

          petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                       7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court

          below/concerned Court in connection with Alauli P.S. Case No.

          42 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:

                       (I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10090 of 2026(2) dt.09-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     the family of the petitioner.

                                  (II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                     fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two

                     consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the

                     bail bonds of the petitioner.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…