Patna High Court

Raunak Kumar @ Raunak MandalversusThe State Of Bihar

Decided: 22 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner as the court was not inclined to grant it on the material presented.

Summary

The petitioner, Raunak Kumar, sought bail in a kidnapping case (Sursand PS Case No. 191 of 2024) where he was accused under sections 364 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He claimed innocence, arguing that the allegations were fabricated and that his only link to the crime was his status as an accused in unrelated cases. The State opposed bail, relying on a co‑accused’s confessional statement and the recovery of a motorcycle allegedly used in the offence from the petitioner’s house. The Court found the material presented by the State sufficient to prima facie establish involvement and was not persuaded by the petitioner's arguments. Consequently, the Court rejected the bail application but directed that if the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, the trial court should decide his surrender‑cum‑bail application promptly.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a kidnapping case under IPC sections 364 and 34.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal cases can be a ground to deny bail.
Whether the recovery of the alleged weapon (motorcycle) and co‑accused’s confession establish prima facie case for denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 364

Subjects

bail
anticipatory bail
kidnapping
IPC 364
IPC 34
false implication
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26939 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2024 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Raunak Kumar @ Raunak Mandal S/O Khelawan Mandal Resident Of
                 Village- Gopalpur, P.s- Sursand, Dist.- Sitamarhi

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   22-04-2026                  Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner who apprehends arrest in connection

                   with Sursand P.S. Case No. 191 of 2024 lodged on 22.04.2024,

                   for the offences punishable under sections 364, 34 Indian Penal

                   Code.

                                3. The accusation against the petitioner is that he,

                   along with others, kidnapped the son of the informant at

                   gunpoint for the purpose of ransom.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. It is

                   contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the

                   present case without any cogent material. The petitioner has no

                   connection whatsoever with the co-accused, who has allegedly
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26939 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                            2/3




          named him, nor with the motorcycle said to have been used in

          the commission of the alleged occurrence. It is further submitted

          that the entire story of kidnapping is fabricated, and in fact, the

          alleged victim himself concocted the story with an ulterior

          motive to extract money from his mother. The only basis for

          implicating the petitioner is that he is an accused in two other

          criminal cases, which cannot be a ground to deny bail in the

          present matter.

                       5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the

          prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner has been named in

          the case on the basis of the confessional statement of co-

          accused, namely, Manish Mandal. It is further submitted that the

          motorcycle allegedly used in the commission of the offence has

          been recovered from the house of the petitioner, which prima

          facie establishes his involvement in the occurrence.

                       6. In this background, this Court is not inclined to

          grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of

          the petitioner in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No.

          191/2024, pending before the learned SDJM, Pupri at Sitamarhi

          is hereby rejected.

                       7. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

          Trial Court within six weeks from today, the Trial Court is
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26939 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
                                                        3/3




                      directed to pass an order on his surrender-cum-bail application

                      on the same day, without being prejudiced by the fact that the

                      petitioner’s anticipatory bail has been rejected by this Court.



                                                  (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…