Patna High Court
Arun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was granted because there was no recovery from the petitioner, the co‑accused had already been bailed, and there was insufficient direct evidence against him.
Summary
The petitioner, Arun Kumar, applied for bail in a case registered under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S, 2023, alleging theft of Rs. 135,550 and a mobile phone. The prosecution alleged that the accused snatched the bag at gunpoint, and the petitioner’s name appeared in the co‑accused’s confessional statement, though the FIR was lodged against unknown persons. The petitioner argued that no independent witness had been examined, the stolen items were recovered from another co‑accused who had already been granted bail, and he had not been arrested at the scene. The State opposed bail. The Court, considering the absence of any recovery from the petitioner, the bail already granted to a co‑accused with graver allegations, and the lack of direct evidence, ordered that the petitioner be released on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of personal appearance and a relative as a bailor.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S, 2023 given the circumstances of the case.
- Whether the inclusion of the petitioner’s name in the co‑accused’s confessional statement suffices to deny bail.
- Whether the lack of independent witnesses and the fact that the petitioner was not arrested at the scene affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- theft
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14593 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Arun Kumar Son of Sambhu Yadav @ Prabhu Prasad @ Umesh Kumar @
Prabhu Rai Resident of Village - Dharhari, P.S.- Chiraiya, District - East
Champaran, Motihari.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sumit Kumar Gupta, Advocate
Ms. Isha Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Aslam Ansari, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 309 (4) of B.N.S, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, miscreants snatched a bag
containing Rs. 135550/- along with mobile and charger from the
informant on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the First
Information Report has been lodged against unknown and the name
of the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of co-
accused. It is further submitted that looted articles were recovered
from co-accused Ripu Kumar who has already been granted bail by
this Court vide order dated 28.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 56593
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14593 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/2
of 2025 (Annexure-P/2). Further, submissions is that no independent
witness has been examined and the petitioner was not arrested on the
spot. Petitioner is in custody since 12.11.2025 and charge sheet has
been submitted.
5. Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of
the case and also considering the fact that no recovery has been made
from the petitioner, coupled with the fact that co-accused with graver
allegations has already been granted bail by this Court, the above
named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where
the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Muffasil P.S.
Case No 63 of 2025, subject to the conditions that :
(i) One of the bailors will be his close relative/family
members.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court
on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two
consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be
liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…