Patna High Court

Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 March 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

The court denied bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Nitish Kumar was arrested on 1 March 2025 in connection with a kidnapping case (Bannubagicha PS Case No.12 of 2025) and charged under several sections of the B.N.S and the Arms Act. The prosecution’s case relies on the confessional statements of a co‑accused, Neeraj Kumar, who named the petitioner as a participant and led to the recovery of the weapon and the victim’s mobile phone. The petitioner argued that he has a clean record, was falsely implicated, and that the evidence was obtained solely through the co‑accused’s statements. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, emphasizing the co‑accused’s confession and the material evidence recovered. The court examined the credibility of the co‑accused’s confession and the seriousness of the offences, and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the petition for bail was refused.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the co‑accused’s confessional statement implicating him
Whether the recovery of the weapon and mobile phone based on the co‑accused’s statement justifies denial of bail
Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent is sufficient to outweigh the seriousness of the offences charged

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 104(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2)

Subjects

bail
kidnapping
confessional statement
Arms Act
criminal procedure
false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70837 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2025 Thana- BANNUBAGICHA District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Nitish Kumar Son of Rajo Mandal Resident of village - Banshipur, P.S.- Kiul,
                 District - Lakhisarai.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Suraj Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anil Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   19-03-2026                      Heard Mr.Suraj Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public

                   Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   01.03.2025 in connection with Bannubagicha P.S. Case No. 12

                   of 2025, F.I.R. dated 22.02.2025 for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 104 (1), 103 (1), 238, 61 (2), 3 (5) of B.N.S

                   along with Section 25 (1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

                               3. According to prosecution case, informant’s son and

                   his friend have been kidnapped and kept hostage by unknown

                   miscreants.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been

                   implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70837 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
                                            2/3




          F.I.R, the name of the petitioner transpired in the case on the

          basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons namely

          Neeraj Kumar thereafter on the basis of confessional statement

          of said Neeraj Kumar, the country made pistol which was used

          in crime in question as well as mobile phone of the victim was

          recovered. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          recovery have been made at the instance of co-accused persons

          and petitioner has no role in the alleged occurrence.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

          submits that co-accused has confessed his guilt and he has

          indicated the name of the petitioner apart from that he has also

          stated in the confessional statement that the petitioner was

          participant of the crime in question. Apart from that, on the

          basis of the confessional statement of co-accused persons pistol

          which was used in crime in question and the phone of the

          deceased was recovered then the prosecution cannot disbelief

          the testimony of the co-accused persons.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,I

          am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection

          with Bannubagicha P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024 pending in the

          court of learned learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70837 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                                    7. Prayer is refused.



                                              (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
vashudha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…