Patna High Court
Jayant KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and conditions, noting the lack of substantive evidence and the pending charge‑sheet.
Summary
Jayant Kumar applied for regular bail in a criminal miscellaneous case involving alleged offences under Sections 109(1) and 61(2) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner argued that he was not named in the FIR, his name only surfaced during investigation based on a mobile number link, and no substantive material connected him to the crime; moreover, no charge‑sheet had been filed and he had been in judicial custody since 25‑04‑2025. The State opposed the bail, contending that the petitioner was one of the shooters. The Court, after considering the lack of concrete evidence, the absence of a charge‑sheet, and the petitioner’s prolonged detention, ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties of equal amount, subject to the trial court’s power to cancel the bail if he attempts to delay the framing of charge or the trial. The order effectively disposes of the bail petition.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being named as a shooter during investigation.
- Whether the absence of a charge‑sheet and lack of material evidence justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
- Arms Act
- charge sheet
- judicial custody
- evidentiary insufficiency
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70954 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran
======================================================
Jayant Kumar S/O Brajbhushan Kumar Singh @ Braj Bhushan Kumar Singh
Resident of Village - Rampur Ganguli, P.S. - Riga, Dist. - Sitamarhi, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anand Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 16-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 109(1) and 61(2) of the BNS
as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges
that unknown accused fired at him causing injury and he saw
Ramesh standing at the corner of the land and a white Scorpio
of Birbal was parked on Areraj main road.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired
during the course of investigation as one of the shooters. It is
further submitted that based on the confessional statement of
petitioner, name of Rikky Kumar also transpired as one of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70954 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
shooters but then it is submitted that Rikky Kumar has been
granted the privilege of regular bail by an order dated
26.11.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 63746 of 2025 passed by a learned
Coordinate Bench of this Court. It is next submitted that though
name of the petitioner transpired during the course of
investigation based on suspicion that his mobile number was
found suspicious based on dumping report but then no other
material transpired connecting the petitioner with the offence. It
is also submitted that petitioner is languishing in judicial
custody since 25.04.2025 and till date has not been put on TIP
and charge-sheet has been submitted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending
in connection with Bettiah Mufassil P.S. Case No. 211 of 2025.
7. It is made clear that if the learned trial court comes
to a conclusion that petitioner after his release on bail is trying
to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70954 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
trying to delay the trial in any manner in both the conditions the
learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of
the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…