Patna High Court
Pappu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, Pappu Kumar, subject to conditions.
Summary
Pappu Kumar, arrested on 14 November 2025 in connection with a police case involving alleged liquor sale, disturbance and assault, sought bail. The FIR alleged offences under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 109(1), 324(4) and 303(2) of the B.N.S., but did not specifically charge him with any overt act. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated and that similar co‑accused had already been released on bail by other benches of the same court. The State opposed the bail application. Considering the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner, his clean record and the precedent of bail granted to co‑accused, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and three conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner, Pappu Kumar, is entitled to bail despite the FIR’s general allegations and the seriousness of the offences alleged under the B.N.S.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the grant of bail to co‑accused justify his release on bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 132, 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 324(4)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- clean antecedent
- FIR
- liquor case
- Patna High Court
- sections 191,190,132,109,324,303
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20951 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-411 Year-2025 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna
======================================================
Pappu Kumar S/O Binda Ray @ Birendra Prasad R/O vill - Ganjpar, P.S -
Athmalgola,Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-03-2026 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Ataur Rahman, learned APP for
the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
14.11.2025, in connection with Athmalgola P.S. Case No. 411 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 11.11.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 132, 109(1),
324(4), 303(2) of the B.N.S.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that an
information was received about the persons being involved in
sale and purchase of liquor, it is stated that a raid was
conducted. While others managed to escape, two persons
including one Mukesh Kumar was arrested. However on an an
attempt by the police to test Mukesh Kumar with the Breathe
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20951 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
2/4
Analyzer machine, it is stated that he as also a large number of
other persons started creating disturbance, pelting stones, thus
damaging police vehicle and causing injuries. It is further stated
that on enquiry and secret information, the name of 14 accused
persons mentioned in the F.I.R. transpired as also there were 10-
15 unknown accused persons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
It appears from the F.I.R. that there is no specific allegation of
any assault or overt act attributed against the petitioner rather
there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused
persons including the petitioner and co-accused person, namely,
Mukesh Kumar against whom the similar allegation has been
granted bail vide order dated 15.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
1368 of 2026 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, another co-
accused person, namely, Mantu Kumar @ Mintu Kumar has
been granted bail vide order dated 20.02.2026 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 4450 of 2026 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court,
another co-accused person, namely, Ashok Rai, Sukhdeo Rai @
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20951 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
3/4
Sukhdeo and Ranjit Kumar have been granted bail vide order
dated 04.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6017 of 2026 and
analogous cases by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, another
co-accused person, namely, Nitish Kumar @ Ledhiya has been
granted bail vide order dated 12.03.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
13381 of 2026 by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. He further
submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet
against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since
14.11.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there
is no specific allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. as
well as similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted
bail by a different Coordinate Benches of this Court, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M.,
Barh, Patna in connection with Athmalgola P.S. Case No. 411 of
2025, subject to the following conditions :-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20951 of 2026(2) dt.30-03-2026
4/4
(1) 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.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) 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 antecedents, 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)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…