Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nitesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to both petitioners subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The High Court considered two bail applications filed by Nitesh Kumar and Sonu Kumar, who were in custody for offences under Sections 310(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 relating to a motorbike theft. Both petitioners argued that they were not named in the FIR and were falsely implicated, citing lack of incriminating evidence, no prior criminal record, and the fact that the recovered motorcycle belonged to Nitesh Kumar. The prosecution opposed the bail pleas. After evaluating the facts, the Court granted bail to each petitioner on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions such as presence in court, cooperation with investigation, and verification of criminal antecedents. The order also clarified that its observations would not affect the trial. Both applications were allowed and disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 given the circumstances of their alleged involvement in the motorbike theft
  • Whether the petitioners' non‑naming in the FIR and lack of incriminating material justify bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • motorbike theft
  • false implication
  • custody
  • section 310(2)
  • section 3(5)
  • court order

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85539 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Nitesh Kumar, S/o Prem Mahto, R/o Village- Pipra Kothi Dih, P.S.- Pipra
                 Kothi, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                                                         with
                             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 85589 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-291 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Sonu Kumar Premchandra Mahto @ Premchand Mahto, R/o Village- Pipra
                 Kothi Dih, P.S.- Pipra Kothi, Dist- East Champaran, Motihari.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 85539 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renuka Ratnakar (APP-125)
                 (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 85589 of 2025)
                 For the Petitioner/s     : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Renuka Ratnakar(APP-125)
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-01-2026                     Since both these applications arising out of same

                   F.I.R., they are being taken up together and are being disposed

                   off by this composite order.

                                   2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                   2. Both the petitioners, who are in custody, seek
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85539 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                            2/4




          bail in connection with Pipra Kothi P.S. Case No. 291 of 2025

          registered for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 310(2)

          and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).

                          3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has

          alleged that seven accused persons on three motorcycles

          snatched away the Apache motorbike of the informant and his

          mobile phone.

                          4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/Nitesh

          Kumar [Cr. Misc. No. 85539 of 2025] submits that the petitioner

          is not named in the F.I.R. and that he has falsely been implicated

          in this case only on mere suspicion. It has next been submitted

          that the motorcycle which is said to have been recovered from

          the house of the petitioner belongs to him and by way of

          Annexure-2, the registration certification has been brought on

          record. It has next been submitted that the perusal of the chassis

          number of the stolen motorcycle and the motorcycle which has

          been recovered from the house of the petitioner, would suffice

          that the motorcycle actually belonged to the petitioner and not to

          the informant. It has further been submitted that till date, no

          T.I.P. has been conducted and the petitioner carries no criminal

          antecedent and he is in custody since 24.08.2025.

                          5. So far as the petitioner/Sonu Kumar [Cr. Misc.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85539 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                             3/4




          No. 85589 of 2025] is concerned, it has been been submitted

          that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has

          been     surfaced      in    the     confessional      statement      of    co-

          accused/Nitesh Kumar.              It has next been submitted that no

          incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious

          possession.      It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner

          carries no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since

          24.08.2025.

                          6. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the

          State, appearing in both the cases, has vehemently opposed the

          prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners.

                          7. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances

          of the case and taking note of the fact that the petitioners have

          remained in custody since 24.08.2025, let the petitioners, above-

          named, be released on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each 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 with

          Pipra Kothi P.S. Case No. 291 of 2025, subject to the following

          conditions:-

                                 (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their
                            close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
                                 (ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present
                            before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85539 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
                                                        4/4




                                        trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
                                             (iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
                                        or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
                                        petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
                                        Court.
                                             (iv) If the petitioners, in future, is found to be
                                        involved in similar nature of offence(s), the prosecution
                                        shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail
                                        bond.
                                             (v) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
                                        antecedent of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is
                                        found that they have concealed their criminal antecedents,
                                        the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for
                                        cancellation of their bail bond. However, the acceptance
                                        of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall
                                        not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
                                        verification.


                                   8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made

                      in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

                                   9. Both the applications stand allowed and disposed

                      off accordingly.



                                                 (Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.