Patna High Court
Raju KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and conditions.
Summary
Raju Kumar was arrested on 19 November 2025 in connection with a case involving the alleged theft of a vehicle at gunpoint, charged under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner argued that he was not named in the FIR and that his inclusion in the charge sheet was based solely on a co‑accused’s confessional statement and a later confession recorded in the case diary, with no other incriminating material or a technical investigation report. The prosecution opposed bail, citing four prior criminal antecedents, though the petitioner was already on bail in those matters, and asserted that the petitioner had confessed to the offence. The court noted the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s non‑mention in the FIR, and the procedural deficiencies, and consequently ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the Judicial Magistrate of Muzaffarpur.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the accused is not named in the FIR and the only evidence is a co‑accused’s confession and the accused’s own recorded confession.
- Whether the accused’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail despite being on bail in other pending cases.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 309(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- confession
- co‑accused statement
- prior criminal antecedents
- Arms Act
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- evidentiary standards
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16746 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- Panapur District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Raju Kumar S/o Harischandra Bhagat R/o vill - Karneji, P.S.- Belsar, Distt. -
Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar Roy, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Anant Kumar 1, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
19.11.2025 in connection with Panapur Kariyat P.S. Case No.
133 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 25.08.2025 for the offences punishable
under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 27
of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, some unknown
miscreants on the point of pistol took away the vehicle of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R and his
name has been transpired during investigation on the basis of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16746 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
confessional statement of the co-accused, namely, Badal Kumar
and thereafter, the petitioner has also confessed his guilt in the
present occurrence which was recorded in paragraph no. 93 of
the case diary. Except the aforesaid, no other material has come
during investigation which suggest the involvement of the
petitioner in the present occurrence and till date no T.I.P has
been conducted by the prosecution. He further submits that the
police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the
petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the
ground that petitioner carries four criminal antecedents other
than the present one but fairly submits that he is on bail in all
the pending matters and apart from that the petitioner has
confessed his guilt in the present occurrence.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R and his name has
been transpired on the basis of confessional statement of the co-
accused person, let the petitioner, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class cum A.M-10,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16746 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
Muzaffarpur in connection with Panapur Kariyat P.S. Case No.
133 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed 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. 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.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U T
Checking your session…