Patna High Court
Shankar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted as the antecedents and evidentiary material warranted detention.
Summary
The petitioners, Shankar Kumar and Ravindra Kumar, were arrested in connection with a theft case (PS Jadia Case No. 201/2025) alleged under Section 309(6) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that three unknown persons snatched Rs. 30,000 and other articles, and a motorcycle used in the crime was recovered from petitioner no. 2. The petitioners claimed false implication, noting that petitioner no. 1 has a prior criminal record while petitioner no. 2 has a clean antecedent, and they offered to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed bail, citing the recovered motorcycle and a self‑inculpatory statement linking petitioner no. 1 to the offence. The Court considered the criminal antecedent of petitioner no. 1 and the material evidence against both accused and was not inclined to grant regular bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed, with a direction that the petitioners may re‑apply if the trial is unduly delayed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Section 309(6) of the B.N.S. in view of the material evidence and criminal antecedents
- Whether the recovery of the alleged weapon (motorcycle) from petitioner no. 2 justifies denial of bail
- Whether a self‑inculpatory statement of a co‑accused is sufficient ground to refuse bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 309(6)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedent
- self‑inculpatory statement
- recovery of weapon
- Section 309(6)
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2969 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2025 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Shankar Kumar Son of Mukesh Kumar Yadav @ Mukesh Kumar Resident
of village-Navadih P.S- Jadia Dist- Supaul
2. Ravindra Kumar Son of Ram Prasad Pandit Resident of village-Navadih P.S-
Jadia Dist- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prafull Chandra Thakur, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umesh Lal Verma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Jadia
P.S. Case No. 201/2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Section 309(6) of B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, three unknown
criminals are alleged to have snatched Rs. 30,000/- and other
articles from the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have falsely been implicated in the case. The name of
the petitioners has come during investigation. Learned counsel
further submits that petitioner no. 1 has one criminal antecedent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2969 of 2026(4) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
and petitioner no. 2 has clean antecedent and they are in custody
since 30.09.2025. The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the
case/ trial.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for regular bail of the petitioners on the ground that the
motorcycle using which the crime was committed has been
recovered from petitioner no. 2 and so far as petitioner no. 1 is
concerned, his name has come in the self-inculpatory statement
of the co-accused.
6. Considering the criminal antecedent and the
allegation levelled against the petitioners, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed and
if the prosecution delays the trial, the petitioners may renew his
prayer for bail.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…