Patna High Court
Raushan Kumar Azad @ Raushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail and allowed the bail application.
Summary
The petitioner, Raushan Kumar Azad, was arrested in connection with a kidnapping and ransom case where a minor was abducted on 7 September 2025 and a ransom demand of Rs. 5 lakh was made. The prosecution’s case relied on mobile call records linking the ransom call to co‑accused Santosh Kumar and Lochan Kumar, and a confessional statement by Lochan Kumar implicating the petitioner as an associate. The petitioner argued he had no direct involvement, no criminal antecedents, and was implicated merely as the brother of a co‑accused. The court examined the evidence, noting the lack of material linking the petitioner to the crime, and considered the provisions of Sections 140(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 regarding regular bail. The court granted bail on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed specific compliance conditions, including regular court attendance and non‑tampering with evidence. The application for bail was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Sections 140(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 despite the seriousness of the kidnapping and ransom allegations.
- Whether the evidence, primarily mobile call records and a co‑accused’s confessional statement, sufficiently links the petitioner to the offence to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 140(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- kidnapping
- ransom
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- mobile call records
- confessional statement
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4599 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2025 Thana- ALAMNAGAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Raushan Kumar Azad @ Raushan Kumar Son of Khusilal Mehta @ Khushil
Mehta Resident of Village - Bhagipur, Ward No.- 05, P.S.- Alamnagar, District
- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bishweshwar Ram APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in Alamnagar P.S.
Case No. 282 of 2025 dated 08.09.2025, registered under
Sections 140(2) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on
07.09.2025 at about 7:00 PM, the informant’s minor son was
kidnapped while playing outside a house. The child could not be
traced despite hectic search and on 08.09.2025 the informant’s
husband received a ransom call demanding Rs. 5 lakhs.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4599 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
present case. It is submitted that during the course of
investigation, it was found that the mobile number 7485031091,
from which the ransom call was made, stands registered in the
name of co-accused Santosh Kumar. It is further submitted that
upon analysis of the Call Detail Records (CDR) and Subscriber
Detail Records (SDR) of mobile number 7485031091, it
transpired that the said mobile number was operated using three
different IMEI numbers, all registered in the name of the said
Santosh Kumar and that mobile number 7762978039 was
recently used in one of the handsets through which the ransom
call was made, stands registered in the name of co-accused
Lochan Kumar, who was thereafter arrested. The said co-
accused is stated to have confessed his guilt and in his
confessional statement he implicated the petitioner as one of his
associates claiming that he monitored developments after
registration of the FIR. Further submission is that on the basis
of confessional statement of Lochan Kumar, the victim boy was
recovered from the house of co-accused Ramesh Mandal and his
wife. It is submitted that the petitioner has no concern with the
vehicle which was used in the commission of crime nor the
place of recovery. The petitioner has been implicated merely on
the ground that he happens to be the own brother of co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4599 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
Lochan Kumar. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner has
been in judicial custody since 09.09.2025 and has no criminal
antecedents.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the
prayer for bail.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let
the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Court of Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Udakishunganj, Dist. Madhepura in
connection with Alamnagar P.S. Case No. 282 of 2025, subject
to the following conditions:-(i) that the petitioner shall co-
operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and
every date fixed 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) that one of the bailors will
be his own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother,
sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall also state on
affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner
is made accused in any other case of similar nature after his
release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4599 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on
ground of misuse and, (iv) that 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.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U T
Checking your session…