Patna High Court
Umesh Kumar @ PawanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The Court allowed the bail application, granting regular bail to the petitioners on condition of bond and sureties.
Summary
The petitioners, Umesh Kumar and Sushil Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 140(3), 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s case is based solely on a confessional statement of a co‑accused, with the petitioners not named in the FIR and no other material evidence against them. The petitioners argued that the FIR was lodged two days after the alleged incident without justification, they have clean criminal records, and have been in custody since 22‑06‑2025. The State and the informant opposed bail, contending that the petitioners’ names emerged during investigation and that suspicion remains. After considering the lack of direct evidence, the delay in filing the FIR, and the petitioners’ clean antecedent, the Court ordered that bail be granted on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties each, and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the accused are not named in the FIR and the only material is a co‑accused’s confession.
- Whether the two‑day delay in lodging the FIR affects the propriety of granting bail.
- Whether the petitioners’ clean criminal antecedent and custody since 22‑06‑2025 warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 140(3), 238, 3(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- confession
- FIR delay
- clean antecedent
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2848 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-385 Year-2025 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas
======================================================
1. Umesh Kumar @ Pawan S/O Devendra Ram R/o - Dhangain, P.S -
Bikramganj, District - Rohtas, Bihar
2. Sushil Kumar S/O Sugriv Ram R/o - Dhangain, P.S - Bikramganj, District -
Rohtas, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Shankar Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
For the informant : Mr. Vinay Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case
No. 385 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections
140(3) of the B.N.S and further added Sections 103(1), 238 and
3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant had gone
to her maternal home to attend a marriage ceremony. While
returning from the said function on 04.06.2025, she learned that
her son was not at home. Furthermore, she also came to know
that Suraj Kumar (son of the informant) had been missing since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2848 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/3
03.06.2025. Thereafter, she filed a missing report in the form of
the present written report.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are not named in the FIR and their names have
transpired in this case merely on the basis of confessional
statement of co-accused Gautam Ram @ Suraj Kumar Bharti
before the police and apart from this confession statement, there
is no legal or tangible material against the petitioner on record.
It has further been submitted that there is a delay of two days in
lodging the FIR without giving any plausible reason for the
same. It has also been submitted that the charge sheet has been
filed against the petitioners and there is no allegation of
tampering against them. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioners have clean criminal antecedent and are in custody
since 22.06.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the
informant submits that there is suspicion against the petitioners
and the name of the petitioners surfaced during the course of the
investigation.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2848 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/3
parties and the nature of material against the petitioners, let the
petitioners above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Court concerned, Rohtas, in connection with Bikramganj P.S.
Case No. 385 of 2025.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…