Patna High Court
Dipu Kumar Singh @ Deepak Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the kidnapping allegations were based only on suspicion and lacked substantive evidence, leading to the disposal of the petition in favor of the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Dipu Kumar Singh, was charged under Sections 137(2) and 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for alleged kidnapping of his informant's nephew, Puneet Singh, based on a complaint by the informant Sambhu Singh. The informant alleged that the petitioner and co‑accused took the victim away on 24‑08‑2025 and that the victim's mobile was switched off, leading to suspicion. The petitioner contended that the allegations were founded solely on conjecture, noting that the victim had taken a loan of Rs.20,000 and was regularly borrowing money, suggesting a financial dispute rather than abduction. The prosecution argued that the victim’s disappearance and subsequent phone call from a co‑accused indicated kidnapping. The court examined the case diary and found no concrete incriminating material against the petitioner, concluding that the charge rested on mere suspicion, and ordered that the petitioner cooperate with the investigation while disposing of the petition.
Issues considered
- What is the evidentiary basis required to sustain a charge of kidnapping under Sections 137(2) and 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
- Whether the allegations, founded on suspicion and the victim's loan transactions, are sufficient to justify continued judicial custody of the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(3)
Subjects
- kidnapping
- suspicion
- loan dispute
- judicial custody
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23274 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2025 Thana- UCHKAGAON District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Dipu Kumar Singh @ Deepak Kumar Singh S/o- Late Ramaji Singh R/vill-
Mahucha Navkar Tola, P.S.- Uchkagaon, Distt-Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Shrishti Rani, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sharda Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 13-05-2026 He
ardt
hel
ear
nedc
ouns
elf
ort
hepe
ti
ti
one
rand
l
ear
nedAPPf
ort
heSt
at
e.
2
.Th
epe
ti
ti
one
rma
kesap
ray
erf
orr
egu
larb
ailin
connection with Uchkagaon P.S. Case No.338 of 2025, F.I.R dated
30.08.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
137(2) and 140(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3.Aspe
rthepr
ose
cut
ionc
as,in brief, is that the
e
informant, namely Sambhu Singh, submitted a written
application before the SHO of Uchkagaon Police Station
alleging that on 24.08.2025 at about 04:00 P.M., the petitioner
along with co-accused persons took the informant’s nephew,
Puneet Singh, with them from his house. It is further alleged
that when Puneet did not return till night and his mobile phone
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23274 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
2/4
was found switched off, suspicion arose. On the next day, the
victim allegedly called from the mobile number of co-accused
Raman Singh stating that he was at Siwan and would return by
evening. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the present
case has been instituted alleging abduction, which is based
merely on suspicion and conjecture.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, as
per the allegations, the petitioner, along with the co-accused
persons, is alleged to have taken the victim with them.
Thereafter, when the victim did not return home, the informant
and his family members are said to have searched for him and,
on the basis of mere suspicion, the petitioner has been
implicated in the present case and taken into judicial custody. It
has further been submitted that, from the case diary, it transpires
that on 19.09.2025, the victim had allegedly taken a loan of Rs.
20,000/- on the promise that he would pay interest of Rs. 300/-
per day, and upon such assurance, the said witness handed over
the amount in question to the victim, namely, Puneet Singh. It
has further surfaced that, as security for the said loan, the
victim, Puneet Singh, had kept his Apache motorcycle with
Pintu Thakur, who had advanced the said amount of Rs.
20,000/- on the promise of payment of interest, and as such
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23274 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
3/4
allegation of kidnapping is false.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that he has been roped
in the instant case merely on the basis of suspicion, whereas the
case diary does not disclose any incriminating material against
him. It has further been submitted that the victim, who is alleged
to have been kidnapped, was regularly borrowing money on
promises to pay interest, which fact has surfaced during the
course of investigation. Accordingly, the allegations levelled
against the petitioner are false and fabricated and the petitioner
is stated to be languishing in judicial custody since 22.11.2025.
6.Le
ar dAdditional Public Prosecutor for the State
ne
oppos
est
hepr
aye
rforr
egul
arba
il
.
7.Cons
ide
rin
gthef
act
sandc
irc
ums
tanc
est
hatnor
ole
ha
sbe
enf
oundt
obea
ttr
ibut
abl
etot
hispe
ti
ti
one
rande
vena
fte
r
i
nst
it
uti
on o
ftheF
.I.
R.,t
hes
aid vi
ct
imk
eptbor
rowi
ngt
he
mone
yfr
om t
hec
o-v
ill
age
rsa
ndo
the
rpe
rs ndthe petitioner
onsa
has been roped in the instant case merely on the basis of
suspicion, whereas the case diary does not disclose any
incriminating material against him and that the victim, and the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 22.11.2025.
8. Let t
hepe
ti
ti
one
rbee
nla
rge
donba
ilonf
urni
shi
ng
ba
ilbondo
fRs
.10,
000/
-(Te
nThous
and
)wi
tht
wos
ure
ti
eso
f
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23274 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
4/4
t
hel
ikea
mount
,ea
cht
othes
ati
sf
act
ionofl
ear
nedA.
C.J
.M.
-1m
Gopa
lga
nj,i
nconne
cti
onwi
th Uchkagaon P.S. Case No.338 of
2025,s
ubj
ectt
othec
ondi
ti
ont
hatthe petitioner shall co-operate
in the investigation/trial.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.