Patna High Court
Arun Kumar @ Arun Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that, since the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the allegation arises only from a co‑accused’s confessional statement, he is entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
Arun Kumar Singh applied for pre‑arrest bail in a theft case under Section 395 IPC where the FIR does not name him. The only allegation against him stems from a confessional statement made by co‑accused Manish Kumar Patel, whose evidentiary value is limited. The State opposed the bail, but the court observed that the petitioner has made a prima facie case for release. Accordingly, the court directed that he be released on pre‑arrest bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The district court was also instructed to verify any pending criminal antecedents, after which the order would lapse if any other case exists.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted when the petitioner is not named in the FIR but implicated solely through a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused has sufficient evidentiary value to deny bail.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS applies to the grant of pre‑arrest bail in this circumstance.
Legislation cited
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 395
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- Section 395 IPC
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- Section 482 BNSS
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45130 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-228 Year-2019 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Arun Kumar @ Arun Kumar Singh (Male), aged about- 32 years, S/o
Virendra Singh@Virendra Prasad Singh, Resident of Village- Salemgarh
Bazar, P.S.- Tareya Sujan, Distt- Kushinagar, Uttar Pradesh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adesh Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
6 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Adesh Raj, learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar, learned APP for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Pachrukhi (Sarai) P.S. Case No. 228 of 2019, registered for
the offence punishable under Section 395 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, some
unknown miscreants six in numbers, had allegedly, looted Rs.
289000, a laptop and two mobiles from the C.S.P. shop of the
informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and have falsely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45130 of 2025(6) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
been implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in
the FIR. Recovery of stolen articles has been made from one co-
accused Manish Kumar Patel, on whose confessional statement
in police custody, the name of the petitioner has transpired,
which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. On these
grounds, petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, the fact that petitioner is not named in
the FIR. Name of the petitioner has surfaced on the basis of
confessional statement made by co-accused Manish Kumar
Patel, from whose possession recovery of stolen articles has
been made. I am of the opinion that petitioner has, prima facie,
made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his/her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court where the
case is pending, in connection with Pachrukhi (Sarai) P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45130 of 2025(6) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
No. 228 of 2019, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…