Patna High Court
Shivam Singh @ Shivam Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted as the petitioner’s name was not mentioned in the FIR and no substantive material had been produced against him.
Summary
Shivam Singh was arrested in connection with a case of dacoity (Section 395 IPC) where an informant was shot. He applied for bail, contending that his name does not appear in the FIR and was only linked to the crime through a co‑accused’s confessional statement, with no other incriminating material or TIP conducted. The prosecution opposed bail, highlighting Singh’s eleven prior criminal cases, though he is on bail in ten of them and acquitted in one. The court noted the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR, lack of substantive evidence, and the fact that no TIP had been carried out. Consequently, the court granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering of evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted when the accused is not named in the FIR and the only link is a co‑accused’s confession.
- Whether the accused’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail.
- Whether the absence of TIP and lack of material evidence justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 395
Subjects
- bail
- Section 395 IPC
- dacoity
- criminal antecedent
- confessional statement
- TIP
- Patna High Court
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82263 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2023 Thana- DUMRA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Shivam Singh @ Shivam Kumar Singh S/o Satyendra Singh R/ol Village-
Mahedew ,P.S- Sahiyara , District- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 27-01-2026 Heard Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, learned counsel
for the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, learned APP for
the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
27.05.2025 in connection with Dumra P.S. Case No. 268 of
2023, F.I.R. dated 31.05.2023 for the offences punishable under
Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
accused persons are alleged to have fired upon the informant
due to which he sustained firearm injury in his right hand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner
is not named in the FIR, his name has been transpired on the
basis of confessional statement of co-accused person, namely,
Aman Kumar @ Aman Yadav and thereafter petitioner was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82263 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
2/3
apprehended in Dumra P.S. Case No. 494/2023 and he has also
confessed his guilt in the present occurrence and except the
aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during
investigation to suggest the involvement of petitioner in the
present occurrence. He further submits that no incriminating
material has been recovered from the conscious possession of
the petitioner and till date no TIP has been conducted by the
prosecution. The police after investigation, submitted
chargesheet and he is in custody since 27.05.2025.
5. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries
eleven criminal antecedents other than the present one but fairly
submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of the bail petition that the
petitioner is on bail in ten cases and in one case he has been
acquitted by the learned trial court.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and also the fact that the petitioner is not named in
the FIR, the name of petitioner has been transpired on the basis
of confessional statement of co-accused person and till date no
TIP has been conducted by the prosecution, let the petitioner,
above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82263 of 2025(3) dt.27-01-2026
3/3
each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Sitamarhi in
connection with Dumra P.S. Case No. 268 of 2023, with the
following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…