Patna High Court
PAPPU KUMARversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
Pappu Kumar was arrested in connection with a kidnapping and ransom demand case, charged under Section 140(2) of the BNS and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on the testimony that the victim’s brother was abducted by a group of men and a ransom of Rs. 50 lakh was demanded, with the only link to the petitioner being his name appearing in the confessional statement of a co‑accused, Chhotu Kumar. The petitioner argued that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons, there was no direct evidence against him, he had no prior criminal record, and co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. After considering the lack of substantive evidence beyond the co‑accused’s confession and the petitioner’s clean record, the Court granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- What is the adequacy of evidence, particularly a co‑accused’s confessional statement, to justify denial of bail?
- Whether the nature of the offences (kidnapping, ransom demand, and arms violations) warrants denial of bail despite lack of direct evidence against the petitioner.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- ransom
- Arms Act
- confessional statement
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17047 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- Karvandiya District- Rohtas
======================================================
Pappu Kumar, Son of Hiraman Paswan @ Hira Ram Paswan, Resident of
Village-Hathini, P.S.- Nokha, District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Ojaswee Kumari, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Aniket, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 140(2) of the
BNS and under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
informant’s brother was returning to home after closing his
grocery shop and in the way he was intercepted by three-four
persons who were in a car. They forcibly made the brother of the
informant sit in the car. It is also alleged that ransom of Rupees
Fifty Lakh were demanded by the abductors by calling on the
mobile phone of wife of the informant’s brother.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. During
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17047 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
2/3
course of investigation one of the co-accused Chhotu Kumar
was apprehended and he has given his confessional statement.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
name of this petitioner has surfaced in the confessional
statement of Chhotu Kumar. Learned counsel has further
submitted that the nature of allegation is general and omnibus.
The allegation is only that ransom was demanded but nothing
was paid, moreover, name of this petitioner has surfaced in the
confessional statement of co-accused. Save and except the
confessional statement of the co-accused, there is nothing
against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
further submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal
antecedent and he is in judicial custody since 29.04.2025. It has
further been submitted that Chhotu Kumar and Chandan Kumar
have been granted bail by the learned Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide Cr. Misc Nos. 86983 of 2025 and 79310 of 2025
respectively. The case of this petitioner stands on similar
footing.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail to the petitioner.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17047 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
3/3
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Karwandiya P.S. Case No. 43 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Rohtas at Sasaram.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…