Patna High Court
AMIT SAHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The Court allowed the bail application, finding insufficient evidence and procedural violations.
Summary
Amit Sah was arrested in connection with a case alleging the recovery of a blue Redmi mobile phone, charged under Sections 305(C) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner contended that he was a bona‑fide passenger falsely implicated on the basis of rumours, that no incriminating article was found in his possession, and that the seizure violated Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 due to the absence of an independent witness. He further argued that the prosecution’s case rested solely on suspicion and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail application. After considering the submissions, the Court held that the procedural lapses and lack of substantive evidence warranted the grant of regular bail, subject to specified conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted under Sections 305(C) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita when the seizure allegedly violates Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
- Whether mere suspicion and lack of direct evidence justify continued detention.
- Whether the procedural safeguards for seizure and seizure list were complied with.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 305(C), 317(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- seizure
- evidence
- suspicion
- procedural safeguards
- Indian criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11436 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2025 Thana- SAMSTIPUR RAIL P.S District-
Samastipur
======================================================
Amit Sah Son of Vijay Sah R/o Donar Gumati- 25, P.O. and P.S.- Kotwali,
District - Darbhanga, State - Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Advocate
Mr.Abhigyan Kumar, Advocate
Ms. Rupa Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umanath Mishra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in Rail Samastipur
GRP P.S. Case No. 190 of 2025 dated 04-10-2025 registered
under Sections 305( C) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. The allegation is of recovery of one blue-coloured
old Redmi mobile phone in a locked condition from the
possession of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a bona
fide passenger and was apprehended by certain train passengers
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11436 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
merely on the basis of rumours and suspicion. It is contended
that no incriminating article has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner. The alleged recovery of a
mobile phone, even if taken at its face value, does not connect
the petitioner with the commission of the alleged offence in the
absence of any supporting material. It is further submitted that
there is no independent witness to the seizure list, which is in
clear violation of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 rendering the alleged seizure illegal and
unreliable. The mandatory procedural safeguards have not been
followed and the entire seizure process appears to be doubtful
and vitiated. It is further submitted that the petitioner was
neither apprehended at the scene nor directly implicated by any
eyewitness and the prosecution case is based merely on
suspicion. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has been in
custody since 05.10.2025 and has no criminal antecedents.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has opposed the prayer.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11436 of 2026(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM Railway
Samastipur, in connection with Rail Samastipur GRP P. S. Case
No. 190 of 2025, subject to the following conditions: (i) that the
petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly
represented on each and every date fixed 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) that one
of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father,
mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall
also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if
the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar
nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the
court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for
cancellation of bail on ground of misuse and (iv) that 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.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U
Checking your session…