Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The bail application was allowed, and the petitioner was released on bail with conditions.
Summary
Rahul Kumar was arrested in connection with a case filed under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alleging that he assaulted a neighbour with a knife. The petitioner contended that the informant, who is also his neighbour, had a property dispute with him and later recanted his statement, claiming the injury was caused by a rock. The petitioner, already in custody since June 2025, sought bail, arguing he would not abscond and would cooperate with the trial to prove his innocence. The State opposed bail, but the informant’s testimony in the trial did not support the prosecution’s case. The court, noting the informant’s withdrawal and the lack of a strong case for continued detention, ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a cash bond and two sureties, subject to cancellation if he attempts to delay the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the informant’s recantation and lack of support for the prosecution’s case justify release on bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- neighbor dispute
- recantation
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- surety
- trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66315 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2025 Thana- PALI District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Rahul Kumar Son of Phulendra Yadav Resident of Village - Bhadsara, Police
Station - Pali, District - Jehanabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Syed Alamdar Hussain, Advocate
Mr. Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Chandra Kishore Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 05-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pali
P.S. Case No. 09 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 352, 109(1), 303(2) and 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and is in custody since
03.06.2025. It is further submitted that in sum and substance the
informant alleges that on 09.02.2025 at about 07:30 PM while
he was going to Mahadevpur and when he reached in front of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66315 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
the house of Shivram, the accused persons including the
petitioner intercepted him and started abusing, on protest,
petitioner assaulted him by knife causing injury on abdomen.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that petitioner and the informant
are neighbours and are having dispute relating to passage. It is
also submitted that charges have been framed and trial has
commenced and the informant has been examined as PW-1
wherein he has not supported the case of the prosecution, rather
has stated that on the date of occurrence he fell on a sharp edged
rock, on account of which got injured. It is further submitted
that when informant himself has resiled from the allegations as
alleged in the FIR, no fruitful purpose would be served by
keeping the petitioner in jail. It is also submitted that petitioner
will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the bail
application, but then learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant is not in a position to rebut the submission of the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66315 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
informant as PW-1 in the trial has not supported the case of the
prosecution.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, is
directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Pali P.S.
Case No. 09 of 2025.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
learned Trial Court comes to a conclusion that petitioner, after
his release, is trying to delay the trial in any manner, in that
event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail
bonds of the petitioner
8. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…