Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Saurav KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Saurav Kumar, was arrested in connection with a kidnapping of a minor under section 140(2) of the B.N.S. The prosecution's case rests solely on a confessional statement of a co-accused, Raja, who named the petitioner; no material was recovered, no TIP was conducted, and the victim's statement was not recorded. The petitioner argued innocence, highlighting the lack of substantive evidence and his prolonged judicial custody since 11 November 2024. The State opposed bail, citing a prior criminal case against the petitioner. After considering the weak evidentiary basis and the circumstances of the investigation, the court granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the pending investigation and lack of substantive evidence.
  • Whether a confessional statement of a co-accused is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
  • Whether the petitioner's prior criminal antecedent warrants refusal of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • kidnapping
  • confessional statement
  • co-accused
  • criminal antecedent
  • judicial custody
  • Section 140(2)
  • B.N.S.

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81086 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2024 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Saurav Kumar S/O Shri Uday Yadav @ Uday Yadav R/o Village- Purvi Fulaut
                 (Purbi Phulaut), P.S.- Fulaut, District-Madhepura

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Abhay Kumar Roy, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   02-02-2026                    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 section 140(2) of

                   B.N.S.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that one minor boy,

                   namely, Mayank Ranjan was kidnapped by unknown miscreants

                   from bus. The bus driver disclosed a number of one of the bikes

                   and has also disclosed that one of the other bike was not having

                   any number.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during course of

                   investigation, one Raja was apprehended and he has given his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81086 of 2025(4) dt.02-02-2026
                                            2/3




          confessional statement and in his confessional statement, he has

          named this petitioner. Save and except confessional statement of

          co-accused, there is nothing against this petitioner. Nothing has

          been recovered from his possession. From perusal of the diary, it

          is clear that charge sheet was filed on 18.01.2025 whereas

          supplementary investigation is still going on. From perusal of

          the diary, it is also clear that in this case, no TIP was conducted

          and even the statement of the victim has also not been recorded

          by the police. As he is the best person who can disclose the

          name of the person who had kidnapped him. Moreover, the

          petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 11.11.2024.

                       5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

          vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail and has

          submitted that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one

          case.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the 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

          Puraini P.S. Case No. 209 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of

          Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81086 of 2025(4) dt.02-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Sessions Judge-VIII, Madhepura.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.