Patna High Court
Md. Raja @ Razzak@ Raj KaranversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that in view of the absence of material evidence against the petitioner and the manner of his implication, bail should be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Raja, was arrested in connection with a jewellery theft alleged under Sections 334(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He had been in custody since 23-06-2025 and possessed thirteen prior criminal antecedents. The prosecution’s case relied solely on the confessional statement of a co‑accused, with no material recovered from the petitioner and no mention of his name in the FIR. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and that there was no direct evidence linking him to the offence. The State opposed bail, but the court, noting the lack of substantive evidence, the manner of implication, and the petitioner’s custody period, granted bail subject to a cash bond of Rs.15,000 and two sureties with standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences and his prior criminal antecedents
- Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused alone suffices to justify continued detention
- Whether the absence of material evidence and non‑inclusion in the FIR warrant bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 334(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- false implication
- confessional statement
- theft
- criminal antecedents
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Indian criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11676 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-32 Year-2025 Thana- VISHNUPAD District- Gaya
======================================================
Md. Raja @ Razzak@ Raj Karan Son of Md. Mujib Rahman Resident of
Mohalla - Gewal Bigha, P.S.- Rampur, District - Gaya jee.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 32 of 2025 instituted for the offence
under Sections 334(1), 303(2) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. Prosecution case in short is that the informant,
owner of jewellery shop, found his shop’s shutter broken and
jewellery looted when he arrived in the morning. He suspected
that theft has occurred during the previous night.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that the petitioner is in custody since 23-06-2025. Petitioner
bears thirteen criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in
paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11676 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
2/3
5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s
counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present
case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner
has transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-
accused Sunny Kumar. Nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner was not even
been put on T.I. Parade. Save and except confessional statement
of the co-accused, there is no material against the petitioner to
establish his complicity in the alleged occurrence. Learned
counsel for the petitioner further submits that other co-accused
has been granted bail by this Bench vide order dated 12.11.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 77414 of 2025.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, period of custody of the petitioner, manner of
petitioner’s implication and there being no recovery from the
petitioner’s possession, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing
of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11676 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026
3/3
amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court
in connection with Vishnupad P.S. Case No. 32 of 2025, subject
to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…