Patna High Court
Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
Bail was denied to Avinash Patel and Nitish Kumar who confessed guilt, and granted to Pankaj Kumar who was not present at the scene.
Summary
The petitioners sought regular bail in a kidnapping case (Telhara P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025) involving the abduction of a 15‑year‑old boy, Aditya Raj, and a ransom demand made via the mobile of co‑accused Deepak Kumar. Avinash Patel and Nitish Kumar were recovered with the victim and confessed to the crime, while Pankaj Kumar was not present at the scene and was implicated only by a confessional statement of another accused. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence and the confessions, whereas the petitioners argued innocence for the latter. The Court held that the confessions of Avinash Patel and Nitish Kumar precluded bail and rejected their applications. Conversely, the Court granted bail to Pankaj Kumar on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to his cooperation in the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to accused who have confessed guilt in a kidnapping and ransom case under Sections 137(2) and 140(3) of the BNS.
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused not present at the scene and only implicated by a confessional statement of another accused.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 137(2), 140(3)
Subjects
- kidnapping
- ransom
- bail
- confessional statement
- Criminal Miscellaneous
- Sections 137(2)
- Section 140(3)
- BNS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61544 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- TELHARA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Avinash Patel S/o Jitendra Prasad @ Jitendra Kumar R/o Village - Balchand
Bigha, P.S - Ben, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 65099 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- TELHARA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar S/o Late Akhilesh Parsad R/o Kanjas Khajepura, P.S.- Telhara,
Distt.- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 87569 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- TELHARA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Nitish Kumar S/O Ram Prasad Ram R/O Village- Harshnathpur, Banhe
Chatra, P.S- Chatra, Distt.- Chatra (Jharkhand).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 61544 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 65099 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Amresh Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 87569 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rajeev Kumar, Adv.
For the State : Mr.Raj Kishor Singh, APP
======================================================
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61544 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as
learned APP for the State.
2. In this case, the petitioners are seeking regular bail
in connection with Telhara P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025, registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(3) of the BNS.
3. The informant, who is father of the victim Aditya
Raj, stated in his fard beyan that some unknown criminals forcibly
kidnapped his son Adity Raj, aged about 15 years, by sitting him in
Bolero vehicle.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in
this case. Except confessional statement of co-accused, there is
nothing against them.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has
opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that using the mobile set
of co-accused Deepak Kumar, the ransom was called for. Thereafter,
Deepak Kumar was arrested and he disclosed the whereabouts of
the kidnapped boy. On his disclosure, the place of occurrence was
raided and the petitioners Avinash Patel and Nitish Kumar along
with the confined boy were recovered. The petitioners Avinash Patel
and Nitish Kumar have confessed their guilt.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61544 of 2025(5) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
circumstances, in my view, the petitioners Avinash Patel (in Cr.
Misc. No. 61544 of 2025) and Nitish Kumar (in Cr. Misc. No.
87569 of 2025) do not deserve the privilege of bail. Accordingly,
their prayers for bail are hereby rejected.
7. So far as the petitioner Pankaj Kumar (in Cr. Misc. No.
65099 of 2025) is concerned, he was not present at the spot and
except the confessional statement, there is nothing against him.
8. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, let the petitioner Pankaj Kumar (in Cr. Misc. No.
65099 of 2025) above-named be released on bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of learned District Additional Sessions Judge 5 th,
Hilsa, Nalanda / concerned court below in connection with Telhara
P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025, subject to the condition that the petitioner
Pankaj Kumar (in Cr. Misc. No. 65099 of 2025) shall cooperate in
the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when
required by the court.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…