Shivam Kumar @ Suman KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3012 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-240 Year-2025 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Shivam Kumar @ Suman Kumar Son of Jayoti Narayan Thakur @ Jot
                 Narayan Thakur Resident of village -Barhampur p.s-Kamtaul Dist
                 -Darbhanga

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Girish Chandra Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-01-2026                  Heard Mr.Girish Chandra Jha learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr.Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned Additional

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   11.11.2025 in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 240 of

                   2025, F.I.R. dated 07.11.2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 309(4) of BNS.

                                3. The FIR of the occurrence of loot is against

                   unknown.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner

                   has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the

                   confessional statement of co-accused person, namely, Sunil
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3012 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                            2/3




          Kumar Pandey and except the aforesaid, no other cogent

          material has come during investigation against the petitioner to

          suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present

          occurrence and till date no TIP has been conducted by the

          prosecution and the petitioner is in custody since 11.11.2025.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the

          petitioner carries four more cases other than the present one but

          fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases, as

          mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner is not

          named in the FIR, the name of the petitioner has been transpired

          during investigation on the basis of the confessional statement

          of co-accused person and till date no TIP has been conducted by

          the prosecution, let the petitioner, above named, be released on

          bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with

          two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          learned Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga in connection with

          Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 240 of 2025, with the following

          conditions:-

                       (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
               Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3012 of 2026(2) dt.20-01-2026
                                                           3/3




                         and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

                         on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                         reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                      (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                         witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

                         for cancellation of bail.

                                      (III) 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 antecedent, 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)
Nitesh/-

U          T