Patna High Court
Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Vikash Kumar was arrested on 3 December 2025 in connection with a loot case (P.S. Case No. 245 of 2025) and charged under Sections 331(4), 305(1), 317(2), 317(4) and 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The FIR named the offence against an unknown person and the petitioner’s name was added later during investigation; the seizure list lacked his or his family’s signatures, allegedly breaching Sections 103 and 105 of the same Act. The petitioner argued that he has a clean antecedent and that a similarly situated co‑accused, Binod Kumar, had already been granted bail. The prosecution opposed bail. The Court, noting the non‑compliance with procedural provisions, the petitioner’s clean record and the precedent of bail to the co‑accused, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite alleged procedural lapses in the seizure process under Sections 103 and 105 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the grant of bail to a similarly situated co‑accused justify bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 105, 305(1), 317(2), 317(4), 317(5), 331(4)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- procedural compliance
- clean antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- loot case
- seizure list
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5662 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-245 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Vikash Kumar S/O Krishna Mahto Resident of Vill- Nuniya Toli, Ward No-
06, P.S.- Kalibagh, Dist- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 03-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner as well as Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
03.12.2025 in connection with Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 245 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 18.11.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 331(4) and 305(1) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023
and Section 317(2), 317(4), 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay
Sanhita, 2023.
3. The F.I.R of the occurrence of loot is against
unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation levelled against
the petitioner is false and fabricated. Initially the petitioner was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5662 of 2026(4) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
not named in the FIR and his name transpired during
investigation and thereafter the petitioner was apprehended and
from his house Rs.14,639/- in cash and 10 silver coins was
recovered. He next submits that the seizure list does not bear the
signature of either petitioner or any of his family members and
therefore there is non-compliance of Section 103 and 105 of
BNSS and similarly situated co-accused person, namely, Binod
Kumar @ Binod Mahto @ Vinod Kumar has been granted the
privilege of bail by this Court vide order dated 31.03.2026 in Cr.
Misc. No. 19502 of 2026. He further submits that the police
after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the
petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 03.12.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and and he is not named in the
FIR and similarly situated co-accused person has been granted
the privilege of bail by this Court and there is non-compliance
of Section 103 and 105 of BNSS, 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 Judicial Magistrate-1st
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5662 of 2026(4) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
Class, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Chanpatiya
P.S. Case No. 245 of 2025, 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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…