Patna High Court
Vipin Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Vipin Kumar Singh was arrested on 29‑04‑2024 in connection with a dacoity case (PS‑96/2024) and charged under IPC sections 399, 402, 414 and Arms Act sections 25(1B)(a), 26, 35. The police recovered a loaded country‑made pistol and several live cartridges and mobile phones from him and four others, and the prosecution alleged that the weapons were supplied by a co‑accused. The petitioner contended that the evidence was planted, that the seizure list was prepared by police witnesses in violation of Sections 103 and 105 of the Bihar National Security Act, 2023, and that he had been falsely implicated. He also pointed out that the charge was framed on 18‑12‑2024 and the trial had not progressed, resulting in an extended pre‑trial custody. The court, noting the lack of trial progress, the long period of detention and the seriousness of the procedural allegations, ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being charged with serious offences such as dacoity and violations of the Arms Act.
- Whether alleged non‑compliance with Sections 103 and 105 of the Bihar National Security Act, 2023, affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the length of pre‑trial custody and lack of trial progress justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1B)(a), 26, 35
- Bihar National Security Act, 2023 — s. 103, 105
- Indian Penal Code — s. 399, 402, 414
Subjects
- bail
- dacoity
- Arms Act
- pre‑trial detention
- procedural lapse
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43314 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2024 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Vipin Kumar Singh S/o Kailash Singh R/o Village - Ramchandra Dohaji, P.S -
Sarai, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
29.04.2024 in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 96 of
2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 399, 402, 414
of the IPC and Sections 25 (1B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 16.04.2024
one Samim Akhtar inspector-cum S.H.O. Bhagwantpur police
station give a written statement on 16.04.2024 in which he states
that he was on vehicle checking with police personals then
received an information that 5-6 persons are sitting at village
Syampur Mangalastan for committing Docaity, after informing
the senior officers, he constitute a police team and proceed on
the place and reached at 3:00 P.M. near Mangalastan, on seeing
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43314 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
2/5
the police five person sitting on a chavutra at Mangalastan try to
flee away, but apprehended by the police personals and officers
and in presence of police witnesses they were searched and on
enquiry they disclose their name as 1.Pankaj Kumar aged about
22 years, son of Phokan Sani resident of village Imadpur, P.S.
Bhagwanpur 2. Rakesh Kumar aged about 21 years son of
Mohan Paswan resident of village Madhopur, P.S. Sarai, 3.
Neeraj Kumar aged about 20 years son of Suresh Rai, resident
of village Hansi cable P.S. Bagwanpur, 4. Neeraj Kumar alias
Golu aged about 19 years son of Amardeep Sahni resident of
village Imadpur P.S. Bhagwanpur District Vaishali, 5. Vipin
Kumar Singh aged about 50 years son of late Kailash Singh,
resident of village Ramchandra dohaji, P.S. Sarai, District
-Vaishali. On search from the body of the apprehended persons
a loaded country made katta with .315 bore cartridge was
recovered from the of Intel vest of Pankaj Kumar and two
mobile set one company and 2nd one is of Redmi has been
recovered. From Rakesh Kumar 315 bore live cartridge and a
Realmi company mobile were recovered. From Neeraj Kumar
7.65 bore live cartridge and Vivo company mobile was
recovered. From Neeraj Kumar alias Golu a Vivo mobile has
been recovered. From Vipin Kumar Singh a loaded desi katta
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43314 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
3/5
with 315 bore live cartridge was recovered. Accordingly seizure
list has been prepared and handed over to each persons, on
inquiry about the arms and mobiles they fail to produce any
paper or license on further query about their gathering they
initially refuse to state anything but after sometime Pankaj
Kumar disclosed that one Abhay Sahni son of Shiv Chandra
sahni, resident of village Raghunathpur P.S. Bhagwanpur
District Vaishali call them to commit loot in the mini bank
(customer service centre), who was here but a few minutes ago
he went to talk with an informer and the arms recovered for
them were also given by said Abhay Sahni and this statement
has been supported by other apprehended persons, Pankaj also
disclosed that the Redmi mobile recovered from him is looted
article from Gajraul village of Mahua PS on 15.03.2024 he also
disclosed that Rakesh and Abhay came together but before
committing the crime they were apprehended.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is
next submitted that it appears from the FIR and seizure list that
that one looted country made pistol was recovered from the
possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that in fact nothing has been recovered from the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43314 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
4/5
possession of the petitioner rather the police has planted the
same and shown that recovery has been made from the
possession of the petitioner. It is next submitted that from
perusal of the seizure list it appears that the seizure list
witnesses are police personnel so there is non-compliance of
mandatory provisions of Sections 103 and 105 of BNSS, 2023.
Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that charge has
been framed against the petitioner on 18.12.2024 and petitioner
is in custody since 29.04.2024 and the trial has not been
progressed.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State
has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases other than
the present case but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in
the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that charge has been framed against the petitioner
on 18.12.2024 and the trial has not been progressed as well as
the period of custody, 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 the learned District and Additional Sessions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43314 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026
5/5
Judge Xth, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Bhagwanpur
P.S. Case No. 96 of 2024, subject to 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
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his 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)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.