Patna High Court
Munna Kumar @ Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that there is no material indicating the petitioner’s complicity and therefore granted pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
Munna Kumar, the owner of a house rented to co‑accused Asiqul Islam and Md. Ashraf, was named in a FIR (Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 539 of 2025) alleging offences under the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, including kidnapping, torture and illegal confinement of 90 unemployed youths. The petitioner applied for pre‑arrest bail, contending that he merely leased the premises on a month‑to‑month basis and had no involvement in the alleged racket. The State argued that the house was used for the illegal activities and the petitioner’s ownership implicated him. The Court examined the FIR and the material on record and found no evidence of the petitioner’s complicity, noting his clean antecedent. Consequently, the Court granted pre‑arrest bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, one of whom must be a close family member, and directed surrender within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner, as the owner of the premises, is complicit in the offences alleged in the FIR
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 127(2), 143(3), 318(4), 336(3), 338, 3(5), 482(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- complicity
- landlord liability
- human trafficking
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1639 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-539 Year-2025 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Munna Kumar @ Vikash Kumar S/O Shambhu Sah @ Shambhu Prasad
Resident of Village- Chhota Bariyarpur, P.S.- Chhatauni District- East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 539 of 2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 127(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3),
143(3), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution
alleges that the SHO of Chhatauni Police Station, East
Champaran has received secret information that some
unemployed young persons from different States have been
made hostage and kept in a rented house on a false promise of
providing job and were physically and mentally tortured. On the
aforesaid information, the police conducted raid and rescued 90
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1639 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
unemployed persons and seized various samples of sale
products and some identity cards as well as mobile phones.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
the entire case is revolving around co-accused Asiqul Islam and
Md. Ashraf along with their partners, who were engaged in
running a business in the name and style of Otamics Company.
The name of the petitioner has been dragged in this case only on
account of he being owner of one of the premises, in which the
company runs its affair. Even from reading of the FIR, it is
evident that the petitioner has rented his flat/house and for the
said purpose, there is a month-to-month rent agreement, duly
executed by the petitioner in favour of co-accused Asiqul Islam
and Md. Ashraf. The petitioner has neither any concern with the
alleged affairs of the company nor there is any whisper in the
FIR and any materials have collected during the course of
investigation. The petitioner bears fair antecedent and he
undertakes that he will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the
Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that the
accused persons had formed a racket, who were involved in
duping the young persons on the pretext of providing job, which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1639 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
was running in the house of the petitioner and, as such, his
complicity cannot be ruled out.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced and
taking note of the fact that save and except the petitioner being
owner of the house, in question, which was given on rent to the
accused persons, there is no material suggesting his complicity
in the crime, besides his fair antecedent, let the petitioner above
named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the court below within a period of four weeks from the
date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in
connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 539 of 2025, subject to
the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that
one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the
petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…