Patna High Court
Sachin Kumar Yadav @ Sachin KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.
Summary
Sachin Kumar Yadav was arrested on 16 January 2026 in connection with a robbery allegedly committed on 27 November 2025, for which he is charged under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleges that six unidentified persons looted a shop at gunpoint, and the petitioner’s name surfaced only through the confessional statements of co‑accused, with no direct material linking him to the crime. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, not named in the FIR, and that no incriminating articles were recovered from him, while other co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing a prior criminal antecedent, but the court noted the lack of substantive evidence against the petitioner. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on bail of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of his criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 in view of the lack of direct evidentiary material linking him to the offence.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 310(2)
Subjects
- bail
- Section 310(2)
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- robbery
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- evidentiary material
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22643 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-293 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan
======================================================
Sachin Kumar Yadav @ Sachin Kumar S/o- Lallan Yadav @ Lalan Yadav
Resident of Village - Katwar, P.S. - Raghunathpur, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 Heard Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Rabindra Kumar, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
16.01.2026 in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 293 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 27.11.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that when
the informant along with his son were at their shop then around
12.05 PM, six unknown miscreants entered the shop and
committed loot of cash and ornaments on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name
transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22643 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
statement of co-accused, namely, Vikki Baitha and except the
confessional statement of co-accused, no other cogent material has
come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the
petitioner in the present occurrence. It appears from the seizure list
that nothing incriminating articles have been recovered from the
possession of the petitioner rather alleged articles have been
recovered from co-accused, namely, Ankit Kumar Kushwaha and
Pradeep Kumar Singh @ Mantu Singh and similarly situated co-
accused person, namely, Sonu Baitha has been granted the privilege
of bail by this Court vide order dated 06.04.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.
22326 of 2026 and the petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2026 .
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the
ground that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent other than the
present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the
bail application that the petitioner is on bail in the said matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let
the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-
1st Class, Siwan in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No.
293 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22643 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
i. 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.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. 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 antecedent,
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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…