Patna High Court
Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Both bail applications are allowed, granting bail to the petitioners with specified conditions.
Summary
The High Court considered two bail applications arising from the same FIR (Pipra Kothi PS Case No. 291 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 310(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Both petitioners, Nitesh Kumar and Sonu Kumar, were in custody since 24‑08‑2025 and argued that they were not named in the FIR, that the stolen motorcycle recovered from Nitesh's house actually belonged to him, and that no incriminating material was found on Sonu. The prosecution opposed bail. After evaluating the lack of direct evidence, the petitioners' clean criminal records, and the prolonged pre‑trial detention, the Court granted bail to each petitioner on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for appearance and conduct. The order clarified that its observations would not affect the trial and disposed of both applications.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 310(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 despite the FIR not naming them directly.
- Whether the recovered motorcycle belongs to the petitioner or the informant, and its impact on the bail decision.
- Whether the absence of a T.I.P. and lack of criminal antecedent justify bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 310(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 310(2)
- Section 3(5)
- theft
- motorcycle theft
- false implication
- pre‑trial detention
- court conditions
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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.