Patna High Court

Sachin Yadav @ Sachin Kumar @ Sachin Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 2 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Sachin Yadav, sought bail in a case (Ekma P.S. Case No. 415 of 2024) alleging offences under Section 309(6) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that unknown bikers stole Rs. 2,00,000 and a mobile phone from an informant, and the petitioner’s confessional statement implicated him. The petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, that the FIR named unknown miscreants, and that no material evidence besides the confessional statement was recovered from him; no T.I.P. was conducted. The State opposed bail, citing the confession and the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the Court found the lack of substantive evidence and ordered the petitioner to be released on bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite having given a confessional statement.
Whether the absence of material evidence and lack of a T.I.P. justify granting bail.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
B.N.S. — s. 309(6)

Subjects

bail
confessional statement
criminal procedure
Arms Act
Section 309(6) B.N.S.
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4700 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2024 Thana- EKMA District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Sachin Yadav @ Sachin Kumar @ Sachin Kumar Yadav, S/O Pawan Yadav @
                 Pawan Kumar Yadav, Resident of Village-Sabhadra, P.S- Manjhi, Dist.- Saran
                 at Chapra

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   02-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Ekma P.S. Case No. 415 of 2024 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 309(6) of B.N.S. and Section 27 of the

                   Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that unknown

                   bikers took away Rs. 2,00,000/- and mobile of the informant by

                   intercepting him while he was returning to his home at Parsagarh.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

                   offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. The F.I.R. was

                   lodged      against        unknown    miscreants.       During      course      of

                   investigation, he was apprehended in Ekma P.S. Case No. 295 of
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4700 of 2026(2) dt.02-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       2025 wherein he has given his confessional statement and in his

                       confessional statement, he has confessed the guilt. It has further

                       been submitted that save and except the confessional statement,

                       there is nothing against him. From perusal of the order of the

                       learned trial Court it will transpire that the recovery of mobile was

                       from the possession of the co-accused. Nothing has been

                       recovered from the possession of this petitioner. It has also been

                       submitted that no T.I.P. was conducted. Petitioner is having

                       criminal antecedent of one case in which he is on bail. He is

                       languishing in judicial custody since 03.12.2025.

                                    5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently

                       opposed the application for bail.

                                    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 learned J.M. 1 st Class,

                       Saran at Chapra in connection with Ekma P.S. Case No. 415 of

                       2024.


                                                       (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…