Patna High Court
Pradip Kumar @ Pradeep Kumar @ Jimmi Thakur @ JimmyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court held that, despite the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s familial connection to the main accused rendered him prima facie implicated, warranting the enlargement of bail subject to statutory conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Pradip Kumar, was named in an FIR (Gopalpur PS Case No. 58 of 2024) for offences under Sections 363, 302/34 of the IPC relating to the disappearance of an informant’s wife. The petitioner contended that, apart from a familial link to the main accused Karelal Thakur, there was no material evidence against him and he had a clean antecedent. The State argued that the informant’s statement, though not an eye‑witness, created a prima facie case of involvement due to the petitioner’s relationship with the co‑accused. The Court observed that the informant’s testimony was insufficient to exonerate the petitioner but, on the basis of suspicion and the familial connection, the petitioner was prima facie implicated. Consequently, the Court ordered that the petitioner’s bail be enlarged, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. The order effectively granted bail to the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can be granted bail when the only basis for his implication is suspicion arising from his relationship with the main accused
- Whether the informant’s statement, lacking eye‑witness testimony, suffices to justify denial of bail
- Applicability of Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. in granting bail in this circumstance
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34, 363
Subjects
- bail
- suspicion
- familial relation
- IPC sections 363 302
- CrPC Section 438
- B.N.S.S. Section 482
- high court
- FIR
- informant testimony
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62852 of 2024
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2024 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Pradip Kumar @ Pradeep Kumar @ Jimmi Thakur @ Jimmy Son of
Manoj Kumar Thakur Resident of Village -Rangra, PS- Rangra, District
-Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pranav Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
6 03-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioner, named in the F.I.R., is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Gopalpur P.S.
Case No. 58 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 363, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per FIR, the wife of informant found missing
while she went to deliver the milk to co-villager since
16.02.2024.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that save and except suspicion, nothing
appears against the petitioner. In support of his submission,
learned counsel drawn attention of this Court towards
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62852 of 2024(6) dt.03-02-2026
2/3
paragraph 23 of the case diary and submitted that thrust of
allegation is available against Karelal Thakur, who has already
been granted regular bail by this Court, and this petitioner
being only nephew of said co-accused Karelal Thakur,
implicated with the present occurrence. It is further submitted
that if paragraph 23 of the case diary i.e. re-statement of
informant, be taken into consideration, then certainly the co-
accused persons must be named in the FIR, but missing of
their names in the FIR only suggests that petitioner and other
co-accused persons were named as a matter of an
afterthought. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State is present.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of the fact as admittedly informant is not an eye
witness of the occurrence, where merely on the basis of
suspicion, as the petitioner is nephew of main accused Karelal
Thakur as mentioned aforesaid, prima facie appears
implicated with the present case, accordingly, above-named
petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period
of four weeks from this order, is directed to be enlarged on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62852 of 2024(6) dt.03-02-2026
3/3
bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand
only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate –
1st, Naugachhia, District - Bhagalpur/concerned court in
connection with Gopalpur (Rangra) P.S. Case No. 58 of 2024,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…