Patna High Court
Bishnu Kumar @ Bishnu Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted, subject to conditions, as the prosecution has not produced sufficient admissible evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
Bishnu Kumar, a shopkeeper, was arrested in connection with a theft of gold, silver ornaments and cash alleged under Sections 305 and 331(4) of the B.N.S. He contended that the FIR was lodged against an unknown person, that a co‑accused’s confessional statement merely mentioned that the stolen items were sold to him, and that the ornaments seized from his shop were not the stolen property. He further argued that no Test Identification Parade had been conducted and that there was no admissible material linking him to the crime, yet he had been in jail since 12‑08‑2025. The State opposed bail. The court, after considering the lack of concrete evidence and the petitioner’s cooperation, allowed the bail application, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and to comply with several conditions regarding cooperation with investigation and non‑interference with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a theft case under Sections 305 and 331(4) of the B.N.S. in the absence of a Test Identification Parade and other admissible evidence.
- Whether the co‑accused’s confessional statement implicating the petitioner is sufficient to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents, if any, affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 305, 331(4)
Subjects
- bail
- theft
- section 305
- section 331(4)
- identification parade
- confessional statement
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78224 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-202 Year-2025 Thana- BARARI District- Katihar
======================================================
Bishnu Kumar @ Bishnu Kumar Sah, S/o Shambhu Prasad Sah @ Shambhu
Sah, Residents of Village - Sonarpatti Barari, P.S.- Barari, District -Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barari
P.S. Case No. 202 of 2025, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 305 and 331(4) of the B.N.S.
3. As per allegation, when the informant was away
from his house, gold and silver ornaments besides cash of
Rs.4,50,000/- have been stolen from his house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that the FIR has been lodged against
unknown. He also submits that the name of the petitioner has
transpired in the confessional statement of co-accused who
confessed before the Police that he has stolen the ornaments and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78224 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
sold the same to the petitioner who is a shopkeeper dealing in
gold and silver ornaments. He also submits that after one and
half months of the confessional statement of co-accused, some
ornaments have been seized from the shop of the petitioner
which are not the stolen property. These ornaments were
purchased by the petitioner for his shop. He also submits that no
Test Identification Parade has been conducted till date for
recognition of the stolen property by the informant. As such,
there is no legally admissible material on record against the
petitioner. The liberty of the petitioner is being curtailed without
any legal justification.
5. He further submits that the petitioner has been
languishing in jail since 12.08.2025.
6. It has also been stated in paragraph No. 3 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has been made accused in another
case.
7. It is also stated in paragraph No. 2 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier
either for anticipatory bail or regular one.
8. However, learned APP for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78224 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-
named, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the
sum of Rs.10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned court
below in connection with Barari P.S. Case No. 202 of 2025 on
the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner will make himself available for
interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required.
(ii) The petitioner will undertake that
investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his
absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police
or the court whenever his presence is required.
(iii) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer.
(iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents other than
the disclosed one, learned court below shall cancel the bail
bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied
that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite
his knowledge of the same.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78224 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong,
learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Jitendra Kumar, J)
S.Ali/-
U T
Checking your session…