Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Rakesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, directing his release on a bail bond with sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Rakesh Kumar, was arrested in connection with the alleged theft of a water lifting motor, alleged to have been stolen by unknown persons and recovered by a person named Chhotu Kumar. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was involved in the theft, while the petitioner contended that no material was recovered from his possession and that he was being framed due to his prior criminal record. The petitioner applied for regular bail under Sections 303(2), 334(1), 317(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, asserting that he had been in judicial custody since 18‑08‑2025 and that the evidence against him was insufficient. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s two prior criminal cases. After considering the facts, the court found no compelling reason to deny bail and ordered the petitioner’s release on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences under Sections 303(2), 334(1), 317(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
  • Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify the denial of bail.

Legislation cited

  • BNS — s. 303(2), 317(2), 334(1), 3(5)

Subjects

  • bail
  • theft
  • criminal antecedent
  • regular bail
  • motor theft
  • Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87261 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2025 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
                 Rakesh Kumar S/o Jogendra Yadav @ Yogendra Yadav Resident of Village-
                 Jadiya, Ward No. 06, P.S- Jadia, District- Supaul

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   05-01-2026                  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 303(2),

                   334(1), 317(2) & 3(5) of the BNS.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that a

                   water lifting motor of the informant was stolen by unknown

                   miscreants. It is alleged that Chhotu Kumar called the informant

                   as he has restrained the petitioner at his shop who has come to

                   sell a motor and is the same which was stolen.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   from perusal of the seizure list it will transpire that Chhotu

                   Kumar has apprehended the motor which is said to be stolen and

                   from that seizure list it is not clear as to how the petitioner has
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87261 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
                                                        2/2




                      been implicated. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

                      submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession

                      of this petitioner and he has been framed in this case due to his

                      antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner has lastly

                      submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since

                      18.08.2025.

                                   5. Learned Additional Prosecutor for the State has

                      vehemently opposed the bail application of the petitioner and

                      has submitted that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent

                      of two cases.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid 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 Jadia P.S. Case No. 173 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

                      Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

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.