Patna High Court
Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner’s involvement, based on the co‑accused’s confession and his criminal antecedent, did not satisfy the criteria for such relief.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 123 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging that he was implicated only through a co-accused's confessional statement and not named in the FIR. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner participated in administering an intoxicating drink to the informant, after which the informant’s valuables were stolen. The petitioner argued innocence, lack of recovery of any stolen property, and that he was not the vehicle owner, while the State highlighted his pending criminal case and the co-accused’s confession. The court examined the credibility of the confessional statement and the petitioner’s criminal antecedent. Concluding that the circumstances did not warrant anticipatory bail, the court rejected the bail application and directed the petitioner to surrender within six weeks for trial‑court proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the accused is not named in the FIR but is implicated solely through a co‑accused's confessional statement.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 123
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 123 BNS
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- criminal antecedent
- FIR
- theft
- robbery
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8256 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2025 Thana- SIMRI District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Sonu Kumar Son of Late Lal Babu Chaudhary Resident Of Village- Abdul
Nagar @ Madhopur Chandwara, Ps -Ahiyapur, Dist -Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manindra Kishore Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Simri P.S. Case No. 229 of 2025, dated 12.08.2025, lodged
under Section 123 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
(hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”), pending before the
Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga.
3. As per the prosecution, it is alleged in the FIR that
after coming out of the station, the informant boarded a four-
wheeler near Bairiya Bus Stand to go home. During the journey,
the driver allegedly gave him a cold drink mixed with some
intoxicating substance, due to which he became unconscious.
When he regained consciousness near Atrabel Bishanpur Road,
he found that his bag and trolley containing gold items worth
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8256 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
about Rs. 30 lakh, along with his documents, ATM card, and
mobile phone, had been stolen. It is also alleged that Rs. 7,400/-
was withdrawn from his ATM card.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
further submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR, and
his name has surfaced in the case solely on the basis of the
confessional statement of the co-accused. Counsel further
submits that nothing has been recovered from the possession of
the petitioner, and he is not the owner of the alleged vehicle.
Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedent of the
petitioner is not clean, as one criminal case is pending against
him.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it
has been acknowledged in the rejection order that the petitioner
is not named in the FIR, but his name has been surfaced in this
case on the confessional statement of co-accused Santosh
Kumar Jha, who stated before the police that he along with
accused petitioner and other has administered intoxicated
substance in his cold drink and when informant became
unconscious then took away bag containing jwellary and cloth
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8256 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
and threw the informant on the road in his unconscious
condition. During investigation witnesses have supported the
prosecution.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that the criminal antecedent of
the petitioner is not clean.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
hereby rejected.
8. It is directed to the petitioner to surrender before
the Trial Court within a period of 6 weeks from today. In case,
the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, then the Trial Court
is directed to pass order on his surrender-cum-bail application
on the same day without being prejudice that the anticipatory
bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court and the
Trial Court shall pass order on the merit of this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…