Patna High Court

Abbu Shama @ Abu ShamaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 5 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

In the absence of substantive incriminating evidence and given the petitioner’s clean record, regular bail was granted.

Summary

The petitioner, Abbu Shama, was charged under Sections 137(1) and 140(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for the alleged kidnapping of the informant's son. The FIR named unknown miscreants, but during investigation the petitioner gave a confessional statement and the victim’s statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS named the petitioner only under Section 180 without attributing any role. The petitioner has no prior criminal record and has been in judicial custody since 16‑08‑2025. The State opposed bail, but the court considered the lack of substantive incriminating evidence, the victim’s non‑attribution of culpability, and the petitioner’s clean antecedents. Accordingly, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail for offences under Sections 137(1) and 140(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Whether the victim’s statement naming the petitioner under Section 180, without attributing any role, is sufficient to deny bail.
Whether the petitioner’s confessional statement, lack of prior criminal antecedent, and the nature of the evidence justify granting bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(1), 140(1), 180, 183

Subjects

bail
kidnapping
confessional statement
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
victim statement
criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84417 of 2025
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-115 Year-2025 Thana- Sonki District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Abbu Shama @ Abu Shama Son of Kamre Alam R/O - Vill. Bhairopatti. Ps.-
                 Bahadurpur. Dist.- Darbhanga                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar                           ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Priyesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Renuka Ratnakar (App 125)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   05-02-2026                  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 Sections 137(1) and

                   140(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the son

                   of the informant namely, Rishi Kumar Mandal was kidnapped

                   by unknown miscreants.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

                   that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. During

                   course of investigation this petitioner has given his confessional

                   statement and it has further been submitted that save and except

                   the confessional statement of this petitioner, there is nothing

                   against him. During course of investigation, the victim was

                   recovered and he has given his statement under Sections 180
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84417 of 2025(3) dt.05-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      and 183 of the BNSS. In his statement under Section 183 of the

                      BNSS he has not named this petitioner whereas in his statement

                      under Section 180 of the BNSS he has named this petitioner.

                      Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though the

                      victim has named the petitioner in his statement under Section

                      180 of the BNSS but has not attributed any role to the petitioner.

                      Learned counsel for the petitioner has lastly submitted that the

                      petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is in judicial

                      custody since 16.08.2025.

                                   5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State

                      has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail to the petitioner.

                                   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

                      Sonki P.S. Case No. 115 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

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

                      each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial

                      Magistrate-IX, Darbhanga.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…