Patna High Court
Pintu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted and dismissed the petitioner's bail application.
Summary
The petitioner, Pintu Kumar, was arrested after villagers recovered a looted TOTO (auto rickshaw) that he allegedly possessed. He is charged under Section 309(6) of the B.N.S. for the theft. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, asserted that the vehicle was recovered from a field, and highlighted his clean record and willingness to cooperate. The State opposed his regular bail application, arguing the circumstances of his capture. The Court, noting that the petitioner was caught with the stolen vehicle, declined to grant bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 309(6) of the B.N.S. in view of the facts of the case
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of criminal antecedent warrant release on bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 309(6)
Subjects
- bail
- theft
- Section 309(6)
- B.N.S.
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1134 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-266 Year-2025 Thana- KATIHAR MUFFASIL District- Katihar
======================================================
Pintu Kumar Son of Lalan Kumar Mandal R/o Bhorabari, P.S.- Muffasil,
Distt- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Katihar Muffasil P.S. Case No. 266/2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Section 309(6) of B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, a TOTO was looted by
unknown criminals who threatened the informant with a knife.
The TOTO was later recovered from the petitioner, who was
caught by the villagers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. It is next
submitted that no TOTO has been recovered from his possession
but from a field. Learned counsel further submits that he has no
criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 03.11.2025. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1134 of 2026(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/ trial.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the fact that the petitioner was caught
by the villagers with the looted vehicle, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…