Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to all three petitioners, directing them to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioners Mahesh Yadav, Rahul Kumar and Pintu Kumar applied for regular bail in a case registered under sections 140(3), 140(1), 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the informant’s uncle had not returned and that a vehicle was used for kidnapping, while the petitioners claimed innocence, stating they were not named in the FIR and were implicated only through a co‑accused’s confessional statement. No incriminating material was recovered from them, and they had been in judicial custody since May‑June 2025. The State opposed bail, citing prior criminal antecedents of the petitioners. The Court noted that other co‑accused had already been granted bail in similar cases and, after considering the circumstances, ordered the release of each petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail despite the allegations and their prior criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 140(1), 140(3), 238, 3(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- judicial custody
- confessional statement
- land dispute
- prior criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10880 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Mahesh Yadav @ Neta Ji S/O Rajdev Yadav Resident of village - Upadhya
Bigha, P.S.- Vishunganj, Dist.- Jehanabad- 804422
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12360 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Rahul Kumar Son of Ramrup Yadav Resident of Village- Erki, P.S.-
Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12869 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2025 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Pintu Kumar @ Kundan Kumar Son of Lal Bihari Yadav @ Lal Bihari Prasad
Resident of Mohalla- Devariya, P.S.- Jehanabad, District- Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 10880 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anmol Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12360 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandni Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 12869 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Chandni Kumari
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10880 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under section 140(3),
140(1), 103(1), 238, 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the uncle of the
informant who has gone to civil court has not returned yet. It is
further alleged that one Xylo vehicle having Registration No.
BR.02M/2363 was being used for kidnapping him.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Learned
counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are
not named in the FIR. During course of investigation, their name
has surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused
person namely, Uday Yadav. There is no role of these petitioners
in the alleged occurrence. During course of investigation, it has
come that there was land dispute of the deceased with many
persons. Nothing incriminating article has been recovered from
the possession of these petitioners. Moreover, petitioner namely,
Mahesh Yadav has been languishing in judicial custody since
03.06.2025 whereas petitioners namely, Rahul Kumar and Pintu
Kumar are languishing in judicial custody since 06.05.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10880 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
Learned counsel has further submitted that other co-accused
persons have already been granted bail by the learned coordinate
bench of this court as well as from this court vide Cr. Misc. Nos.
71587 of 2025, 69983 of 2025 and 77729 of 2025. The case of
this petitioner stands on similar footing.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer of regular bail and has submitted that
petitioner namely Mahesh Yadav and Rahul Kumar is having one
criminal antecedent whereas petitioner namely, Pintu Kumar is
having criminal antecedent of four cases.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named
petitioners are directed to be released on bail in connection with
Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 337 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Jehanabad.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…