Patna High Court
Lakhindra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, holding that the evidence does not warrant continued detention.
Summary
Lakhindra Kumar, who is not named in the FIR, was implicated through the confessional statement of co‑accused Manish, indicating that he had knowledge of a murder plot but did not participate. He is charged under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act and has been in judicial custody since 5 January 2026. The petitioner argued that the only material against him is his knowledge of the plan, he has no criminal antecedent, and the confession of Manish is the sole basis for his implication. The State opposed bail, contending that the confession links him to the offence. The Court examined the bail principles, noting the lack of direct involvement, the petitioner’s clean record, and the fact that he is only a witness to the plan, and therefore found no sufficient ground to deny bail. Consequently, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner, not named in the FIR but implicated through a co‑accused’s confessional statement, is entitled to bail.
- Whether the material evidence against the petitioner is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- B.N.S. Act — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- B.N.S Act
- Arms Act
- confessional statement
- FIR
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33015 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2026 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Lakhindra Kumar S/o Dukha Rai Resident of Village- Bariyarpur, Ward No.
37, P.S.- Sitamarhi, Distt.- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Renu Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 14-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Dumra P.S. Case No. 02 of 2026 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S Act
and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that Shashi
Bhushan Kumar, Lokesh Singh, Raghunath Mahto, Mukesh Jha,
and Manish have sought the brother of the informant altogether
11 accused persons are named in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel of the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the
petitioner has surfaced during investigation in the confessional
statement of co-accused, Manish. The confessional statement of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33015 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
2/3
co-accused, Manish is annexed as Annexure-P/2 and from
perusal of the confessional statement of co-accused, Manish, it
is clear that the petitioner came to know about the plan of killing
the deceased before his shop, he protested and on that day, the
plan to kill the deceased was differed and on further day, the
deceased was killed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
further submitted that if all the confessional statement of
Manish is taken to be true then also the only material which has
come against the petitioner is that he was having knowledge
about the plan of killing the deceased to which he has objected.
He is not the part of the plan rather he was only informed by the
co-accused Manish regarding the plan. It has further been
submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent
and he is in judicial custody since 05.01.2026.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33015 of 2026(2) dt.14-05-2026
3/3
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Dumra
P.S. Case no 02 of 2026.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
sanjeev/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.