Patna High Court
Saroj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court grants bail to the petitioner, directing him to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Saroj Kumar, was arrested in connection with a robbery and murder alleged to have occurred near Bhatrandha Bridge, for which he was charged under Sections 309(6) and 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and his uncle were on a bike when three assailants robbed an informant, snatched cash and a mobile, and one assailant fired a bullet that killed the informant’s uncle. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating the FIR named unknown miscreants, that his name appeared only through a spy’s statement, and that the stolen mobile was recovered from him without a proper TIP, while also highlighting his prolonged judicial custody since September 2025. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s two prior criminal cases. After hearing both sides, the Court found the circumstances sufficient to grant bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of equal amount. The order thus enlarges the petitioner on bail pending trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences under the B.N.S., 2023 and the Arms Act.
- Whether the evidence against the petitioner, including the recovered mobile and statements, justifies continued judicial custody.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 309(6)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- robbery
- murder
- judicial custody
- false implication
- B.N.S. 2023
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17294 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2025 Thana- Parmanandpur District- Madhepura
======================================================
Saroj Kumar Son of Shyam Sundar Yadav Resident of Village - Padampur,
Ward No. 09, P.S. - Bihra, District - Saharsa.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Praveen, Advocate
Mr. Barun Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 23-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Parmanandpur P.S. Case No. 29 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 309(6), 103(1) of the B.N.S.,
2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner and his uncle were on their bike and as they reached
near Bhatrandha Bridge, three persons surrounded the bike of
the informant. It is also that one of them also snatched nine
thousand rupees and a mobile from the informant. It is further
alleged that one of the miscreants fired at the uncle of the
informant, who died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17294 of 2026(2) dt.23-03-2026
2/3
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
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 statement of the spy. He also
submits that from perusal of the order of the learned trial court,
it is stated that the stolen mobile was recovered from the
possession of the petitioner. He further submits that no TIP has
been conducted. During the course of investigation, one Mannu
Kumar has given his confessional statement in which he has
stated that he has fired a bullet at the deceased. Moreover, the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 11.09.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal
antecedent of two cases.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17294 of 2026(2) dt.23-03-2026
3/3
Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura in connection with
Parmanandpur P.S. Case No. 29 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…