Patna High Court
Pappu MiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
In the absence of substantive evidence and given the prolonged pre‑trial custody, the petitioner is entitled to bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Miya, was implicated in a robbery case (IPC Section 392) arising from an incident on 06-11-2023 where two assailants allegedly stole a motorcycle key, cash and parcels. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, was not named in the FIR, and that a confessional statement recorded in a separate police case had no evidentiary value. No incriminating articles were recovered from his possession and a thorough investigation (TIP) had not been conducted, although he had been in custody since 14-05-2024 and possessed nine prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed bail, but the court examined the lack of substantive evidence, the prolonged pre‑trial detention, and the inadmissibility of the confessional statement. Accordingly, the court granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and specific conditions regarding appearance and family surety. The order directed that bail be effected after framing of charge, if not already done.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case of alleged robbery under IPC Section 392 pending trial.
- Whether a confessional statement recorded in a different police case is admissible as evidence.
- Whether the absence of recovered material evidence and the non‑conduct of a TIP affect the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- bail
- robbery
- IPC 392
- confessional statement
- pre‑trial detention
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 82862 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2023 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Pappu Miya Son of Saheb Hussain Resident of Village- Surawaniya, P.S.-
Manjhagarh, District- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Javed Aslam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 396 of 2023 instituted for the
offences under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 06.11.2023,
while informant was on the way to Chitauli to Allapur, in the
meantime, two unknown miscreants came on motorcycle and
snatched away the key of motorcycle on the point of pistol and
after that they snatched his cash and some undelivered parcels
worth of Rs. 25,291/- and fled away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The confessional statement
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 82862 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
of petitioner has been recorded in Gopalganj Town P.S. Case
No. 886 of 2023 in which he confessed his guilt and involvment
in the present case. Thereafter, he has been remanded in this
case. The confessional statement recorded before the Police has
no evidentiary value. No incriminating/looted article has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
Learned counsel further submitted that T.I.P. has not been
conducted till date to ascertain the involvement of the petitioner
in the alleged offence. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 14.05.2024 and
has nine criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, as also the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing
of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Manjhagarh P.S.
Case No. 396 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 82862 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…