Patna High Court

Anoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Anoj Kumar, sought regular bail in a case registered under sections 308(5) and 3(5) of the BNS, alleging that he was falsely implicated and not named in the FIR. The prosecution alleged that unknown miscreants assaulted a worker at a construction site and that the petitioner’s name surfaced only through confessional statements of co‑accused Rahul Kumar and Sonu. The petitioner argued that no material evidence besides the confessional statements linked him to the crime and highlighted that a co‑accused had previously been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s two prior criminal antecedents. Considering the lack of substantive evidence and the petitioner’s prolonged custody since June 2025, the court inclined to grant bail, directing release upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the confessional statements of co‑accused.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and lack of other evidence justify bail.

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 308(5), 3(5)

Subjects

regular bail
criminal antecedents
confessional statement
BNS
sections 308(5)
sections 3(5)
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7014 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-232 Year-2025 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Anoj Kumar S/o Devnandan Yadav Resident of Village- Mahadev Asthan,
                 P.S.- Gurua, Distt.- Gaya Ji                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 308 (5), 3

                   (5) of the BNS.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that on 01.06.2025

                   at about 1:00 A.M. some unknown miscreants came on the

                   construction site and assaulted the worker and care taker. They

                   snatched the mobile of care taker, namely, Ajay Yadav. They

                   have also given letter of CPI party and demanded extortion

                   money.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                   connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the

                   petitioner is not named in the FIR. During the course of
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7014 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      investigation, one Rahul Kumar                 and Sonu allegedly made

                      confessional statement and solely on the basis of such statement,

                      the name of the petitioner has surfaced. It is further submitted

                      that save and except the confessional statement, nothing has

                      come against this petitioner to implicate him. It is contended

                      that similar situated co-accused, has already been extended the

                      privilege of bail vide order dated 16.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc.

                      No. 85183 of 2025. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in

                      judicial custody since 04.06.2025.

                                   5.     Learned APP appearing for the State has

                      vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail stating that the

                      petitioner has two criminal antecedents.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                      of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

                      bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on

                      bail in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 232 of 2025 on

                      furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

                      sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

                      Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Sherghati at Gaya.


                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…