Patna High Court

Ravi KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 8 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: ALOK KUMAR SINHA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Ravi Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNS) concerning a stolen tractor. He was not named in the FIR; his name surfaced only through statements of co‑accused Rahul Kumar and Manish Kumar Yadav, who had already been granted regular bail. The State opposed the anticipatory bail, arguing the petitioner’s implication was material. The Court, considering the lack of direct FIR mention and the bail already granted to co‑accused, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, cooperation with investigation, and verification of any criminal antecedent. The order invoked Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNS, 2023.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a person not named in the FIR but implicated through co‑accused statements under Section 303(2) of the BNS.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 482
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 303(2) BNS
co‑accused statements
bail conditions
criminal antecedent verification
CrPC Section 438
BNS Section 482

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21041 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-605 Year-2025 Thana- PALIGANJ District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Ravi Kumar Son of Ram Nand Yadav @ Ramanand Yadav Resident of
                 Village - Savdhan Bigha, P.S.- Haspura, District - Aurangabad, Bihar

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Amrit Lal
                 For the State            :        Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Section 303(2) of

                   BNS in connection with Paliganj P.S.Case No. 605 of 2025.

                                 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and hase falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR, and

                   subsequently, during investigation, the name of the petitioner

                   has surfaced on the basis of the statement of co-accused Manish

                   Kumar Yadav.

                                 4. The petitioner was not named in the FIR. His name

                   has come up on the basis of the statements made by co-accused

                   persons, namely, Rahul Kumar and Manish Kumar Yadav. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21041 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                            2/3




          co-accused persons Rahul Kumar and Manish Kumar Yadav

          have already been granted regular bail, vide order dated

          02.03.2026 passed in Bail Petition No. 189/2026 by the court of

          Additional Sessions judge-III, Danapur, Patna. The recovery of

          the stolen tractor is also said to have been made from the

          possession of the co-accused persons, who have been granted

          regular bail.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering all these circumstances, I am inclined

          to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to both the petitioner.

                       7. Let the petitioner, as named above, in the event of

          his arrest or surrender within four weeks from today, be

          enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

          Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction learned SDJM, Danapur, Patna in connection with

          Paliganj P.S.Case No. 605 of 2025, subject to the conditions

          laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal

          Procedure/Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha

          Sanhita, 2023 and subject to further condition that :-

                       (i) the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation/

          trial.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21041 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                                  (ii) the learned Court would, however, verify the

                     criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case it is found that

                     the petitioners have concealed his criminal antecedent, the Court

                     below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the

                     petitioner. However, it is expected that the verification process

                     would be done expeditiously without causing any delay.



                                              (Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
HR/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…