Patna High Court
Sumit Kumar @ Sumit YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and conditions, as the allegations were not substantiated by direct evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar (also known as Sumit Yadav), was arrested on 9 September 2025 in connection with a case registered on 26 April 2025 for offences under Sections 309(4) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. The FIR does not name the petitioner; his alleged involvement is derived solely from the confessional statement of a co‑accused, Ankush Raj, and no material was recovered from the petitioner’s possession. No turn‑in‑piece (TIP) investigation was conducted by the prosecution, and the chargesheet was filed on 13 October 2025. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, that the case against him is fabricated, and that he is already on bail in other pending matters. The State opposed bail, citing five other cases against the petitioner, but the Court, noting the lack of direct evidence and the reliance on a co‑accused’s confession, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for cooperation and non‑tampering.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the accusation is based solely on a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
- Whether the absence of a TIP investigation and lack of recovered material from the petitioner justify bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s pending criminal cases affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 309(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- FIR
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25202 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2025 Thana- IMADPUR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Sumit Kumar @ Sumit Yadav Son of Vinod Singh @ Vinod Yadav Resident
of village Saidanpur, P.S.-Tarari, District- Bhojpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
09.09.2025, in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025,
F.I.R. dated 26.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 309(4), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The F.I.R. of the occurrence of loot is against
unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in
the F.I.R. and the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the
basis of confessional statement of co-accused person namely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25202 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
Ankush Raj and nothing has been recovered from the possession
of the petitioner rather recovery has been made from co-accused
person and till date no TIP was conducted by the prosecution. He
further submits that the police after investigation submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner on 13.10.2025 and the petitioner
is in custody since 09.09.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
and submits that the petitioner carries five more cases other than
the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of
the bail petition that the petitioner is on bail in the pending
matters.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R and the
name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of co-accused person and till date no TIP
was conducted by the prosecution, 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 Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bhojpur at
Ara in connection with Imadpur P.S. Case No. 54 of 2025, subject
to the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25202 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.