Patna High Court
Amol Bharti @ Amol YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner with conditions, despite the later naming in the FIR and the State’s objections.
Summary
Amol Bharti (Amol Yadav) was arrested in connection with a murder case (PS Pratapganj Case No. 144 of 2021) under IPC sections 302, 120(B)/34 and Arms Act section 27. He was not originally named in the FIR dated 20‑11‑2021, but his name emerged later from the confessional statement of co‑accused Deepak Kumar, who had earlier been granted bail. Bharti surrendered on 13‑10‑2025 and filed a bail petition, arguing the FIR was filed three days after the alleged offence and that the naming of the petitioner was a later investigative development. The State opposed bail, citing Bharti’s own confession, alleged political motive, and his other pending cases. The Court, noting the procedural irregularities and the fact that the co‑accused had been bailed, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence, and ordered that verification of antecedents should not delay acceptance of the bond.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused named later in the FIR based on a co‑accused’s confession.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the petitioner’s alleged confession justify denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s other pending cases affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- FIR delay
- confession
- political dispute
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11167 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-144 Year-2021 Thana- PRATAPGANJ District- Supaul
======================================================
Amol Bharti @ Amol Yadav S/O Sukhdeo Yadav R/O Tintolia, P.S.-
Pratapganj, Dist.- Supaul, 852125
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Purushottam Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard Mr.Purushottam Kumar, learned counsel for
the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr.Shyam
Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
13.10.2025 in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 144 of
2021, F.I.R. dated 20.11.2021 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 302,120(B)/34 of IPC and Section
27 of Arms Act.
3. The FIR of the occurrence of murder is against
unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
initially the petitioner was not named in the FIR. The name of
the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11167 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/4
basis of the confessional statement of apprehended co-accused
person. Thereafter, the petitioner has surrendered suo motu on
13.10.2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears that the date of
occurrence as alleged in the FIR is 17.11.2021 but the present
FIR has been instituted on 20.11.2021 after delay of three days
without giving any explanation of delay. Further submits that
the person, who has confessed the name of the petitioner,
namely, Deepak Kumar, has been granted bail by a Coordinate
Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 03.11.2022 passed
in Cr. Misc. No.39782 of 2022 and the police, after
investigation, submitted the chargesheet against the petitioner
and the petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned
A.P.P. for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has himself
confessed before the police that he was involved in the present
crime in question due to previous political dispute, apart from
that, the petitioner carries two more cases other than the present
one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in both the
cases, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, initially the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11167 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/4
petitioner was not named in the FIR, the name of the petitioner
has been transpired during investigation and the person, who has
confessed the name of the petitioner, namely, Deepak Kumar,
has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble
Court, 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 learned
Sessions Judge, Supaul in connection with Pratapganj P.S. Case
No. 144 of 2021, with 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11167 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
4/4
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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…