Patna High Court

Mangal Kumar @ JanuversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 April 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court refused bail, holding that the petitioner should remain in custody until trial, with a possibility to renew the bail application after six months.

Summary

Mangal Kumar was arrested in connection with a robbery in which a bike key, purse, ATM card, driving licence, mobile phone and Rs.55,000 were allegedly taken at gunpoint. The prosecution alleges that the looted mobile was recovered from the petitioner’s possession and that he has five prior similar cases. The petitioner claims innocence, stating that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants and that his name surfaced only through a co‑accused’s confessional statement, and he seeks bail. The State opposes bail, emphasizing the possession of the stolen mobile and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. After hearing both sides, the court declined to grant bail at this stage, allowing the petitioner to re‑apply after six months if the trial remains pending, and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings. The bail application was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S., 2023 in view of the alleged theft and his prior criminal record

Legislation cited

Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 309(4)

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
theft
armed robbery
prior criminal antecedent
trial expeditious

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17194 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-523 Year-2025 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Mangal Kumar @ Janu S/O Santosh Kumar @ Santosh Kumar Sah R/O
                 Village- Mani Sirisiya, Hussepur, hassepur, Police Station-Amnour, District-
                 Saran

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 523 of 2025 registered for

                   the offence punishable under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S.,

                   2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that some

                   unknown miscreants have looted the key of the bike, purse,

                   ATM card, driving license, mobile and Rs. 55,000/- from the

                   informant at gunpoint.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

                   committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17194 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     case. He also submits that the FIR was lodged against unknown

                     miscreants. During the course of the investigation, the name of

                     this petitioner has surfaced on the basis of the confessional

                     statement of co-accused Suraj Kumar. He further submits that

                     one mobile was recovered from the possession of the petitioner,

                     which is said to be the looted mobile. Moreover, the petitioner is

                     languishing in judicial custody since 26.11.2025.

                                  5. Countering this, the application for bail is

                     vehemently opposed by learned APP for the State and submits

                     that the looted mobile has been recovered from the conscious

                     possession of the petitioner. He also submits that the petitioner

                     is having criminal antecedent of five cases of similar nature.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage,

                     however the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for

                     bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.

                                  7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial

                     and conclude the same within the stipulated period of time.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…