Patna High Court
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Santosh Yadav, was arrested in connection with a robbery under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code involving the theft of a steel‑laden trailer worth Rs.22,00,314. He contended that his name does not appear in the FIR and that the only link to him is a confessional statement of a co‑accused, with no incriminating material recovered from his possession. The prosecution opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offence. The court noted that other co‑accused had been granted bail and that there was no direct evidence against the petitioner, despite his prior criminal antecedent. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for appearance and conduct.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a robbery case under Section 392 IPC when the only evidence is a co‑accused's confessional statement and no material is recovered from the accused.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- bail
- robbery
- Section 392 IPC
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68925 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-236 Year-2022 Thana- BARUN District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar, S/o Brij Bihari Singh R/o Village- Mowap
Kurde, P.S- Emadpur, Dist.- Bhojpur, Ara, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kedar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 07-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with Sessions Trial No. 1246 of 2022 arising out of
Barun P.S. Case No. 236 of 2022, G.R. No. 1246 of 2022
registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, four unknown
miscreants are said to have taken away the trailer of the
informant loaded with steel worth of Rs.22,00,314/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced in
the confessional statement of co-accused Santosh Kumar Pandit.
It has been submitted that except the said confessional statement
there is nothing on record to connect the petitioner with the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68925 of 2025(4) dt.07-01-2026
2/3
aforesaid incident. It has been asserted that no incriminating
article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the
petitioner and the same has been recovered by the police, as
would be evident from perusal of the case diary, from
somewhere else. It has further been submitted that till date no
TIP has been conducted and the petitioner is in custody since
17.04.2025. It has next been submitted that charge-sheet has
already been submitted and similarly situated co-accused
persons, namely, Santosh Kumar Pandit, Suryadeo Singh,
Dinesh Prasad, Amit Kumar, Arjun Paswan, Amar Kumar and
Vickky Kumar, have all been granted bail by different learned
Co-ordinate Benches of this Hon’ble Court. It has lastly been
submitted that the petitioner has one criminal antecedent.
5. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
parties, 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
court below where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Sessions Trial No. 1246 of 2022 arising out of
Barun P.S. Case No. 236 of 2022, G.R. No. 1246 of 2022,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68925 of 2025(4) dt.07-01-2026
3/3
subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner
shall be his close relative and the other shall be
local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically
present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two
consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the
bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to
be cancelled by the court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in
similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution
shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his
bail bond.
(v) The learned 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…