Patna High Court
Sandeep Jha @ Sandeep Kumar JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandeep Jha, was in custody for offences under Sections 309(4), 310(2), 311 and 317(3) of the B.N.S. following a robbery complaint. He sought bail, arguing that his implication was based solely on the confessional statement of a co‑accused, with no material evidence, no recovery, and no T.I.P. conducted, and that he had been detained since 31‑05‑2025. The prosecution opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s eight prior convictions. The Court examined the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the crime and considered his antecedents, ultimately granting bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and imposing several conditions, including regular reporting to the Superintendent of Police. The order clarified that any observations made therein would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving serious offences under the B.N.S. despite the petitioner’s criminal antecedents.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused, without corroborative material, suffices to justify continued detention.
- Whether the absence of recovery of stolen items and lack of a T.I.P. warrant bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 309(4), 310(2), 311, 317(3)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- confessional statement
- antecedents
- Sections 309, 310, 311, 317
- Bihar
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84600 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2025 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sandeep Jha @ Sandeep Kumar Jha S/O Kumod Jha Resident of Village-
Bahilwara Roopnath, Police Station- Saraiya, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 29 of 2025 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 309(4), 310(2), 311 and
317(3) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that while he was returning from his office, four
miscreants surrounded him and snatched away his motorcycle,
mobile phone and a gold ring.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case
merely on account of his alleged antecedents of similar nature.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84600 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/4
It is contended that the petitioner has been remanded in the
present case solely on the basis of the confessional statement of
the co-accused, namely, Raja Mahto and that no recovery has
been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is
further pointed out that till date no T.I.P. has been conducted and
that there is no material on record to connect the petitioner with
the aforesaid incident. Lastly, the learned counsel submits that,
although the petitioner has eight criminal antecedents, he has
been in custody since 31.05.2025.
5. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and
circumstances of the case, 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 each to the
satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection Lalganj P.S. Case No. 29
of 2025 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative and the other shall be local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84600 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/4
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner
will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to
move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned 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.
(vi) In view of the antecedent of the petitioner, the
petitioner is directed to appear before the Superintendent of
Police, Muzaffarpur within fifteen days of his release with a
copy of this order and every two weeks thereafter for the next
nine months. The conduct of the petitioner will be kept under
watch in this period by the Superintendent of Police concerned
and if it is found wanting in any respect, a report shall be made
to the court concerned by him to initiate a proceeding for
cancellation of bail for reasons of misuse of bail. After reporting
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84600 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
4/4
to the Superintendent of Police, a certificate will be filed by the
petitioner before the court concerned.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U T
Checking your session…