Patna High Court

Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SHAILENDRA SINGH

Holding

The Court held that, in view of the lack of admissible evidence and the failure of the prosecution to refute the petitioner’s claims, bail must be granted.

Summary

The petitioner, Rahul Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under sections 309(4) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. He argued that there is no incriminating evidence, no looted articles were recovered, and he was not subjected to a test identification parade, while a co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed, contending that the petitioner had concealed his prior criminal record, which the trial court considered in rejecting bail. The learned APP could not refute the petitioner’s submissions. The Court, finding no admissible evidence against the petitioner, ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties, thereby granting the bail application.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted in the absence of incriminating evidence.
Whether the failure to conduct a test identification parade affects the bail decision.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 309(4), 317(2)

Subjects

regular bail
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
section 309
section 317
identification parade
criminal antecedents
bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87525 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2025 Thana- BHUTAHI District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Rahul Kumar Son of Rajendra Singh R/o Village - Jabdi Loharpatti, Ward no.
                 01, P.S. - Parihar, Dist. - Sitamarhi.                   .. ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar                               .. ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-01-2026                   Heard Mr. Krishna Prabhat, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned APP for the

                   State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Bhutahi P.S. Case No. 36 of 2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under sections 309(4) and 317(2) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita.

                                3. The main submissions advanced by petitioner’s

                   counsel are that the petitioner was arrested in Bela P.S. Case No.

                   148/2025 and thereafter, he was remanded in three more cases

                   and so far as the merit of the allegation to the present matter is

                   concerned, there is nothing incriminating evidence to show the

                   petitioner’s involvement in the alleged crime of loot and after the

                   petitioner was taken into custody, the police failed to recover any

                   looted article from the possession of the petitioner and he was

                   not put on Test Identification Parade before the informant or
         Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87525 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
                                                     2/2




                   other important witnesses for identification process and one co-

                   accused, namely, Raghubeer Kumar, who has also been made

                   accused in the present matter in similar manner, has been granted

                   bail by the trial court itself.

                                4. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer of

                   the petitioner but has not been able to refute the aforesaid

                   submissions made by petitioner’s counsel, however, he has

                   submitted that before the trial court the petitioner suppressed the

                   details of his criminal antecedents which was mainly considered

                   by the trial court while rejecting his bail prayer.

                                5. Considering the above submissions, averments

                   made in this application and mainly taking into account the

                   petitioner’s aforesaid plea that there is nothing admissible

                   evidence against him which has not been refuted by the learned

                   APP, this Court is inclined to release him on bail. Accordingly,

                   let the petitioner named-above be released on bail on furnishing

                   bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two

                   sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court

                   concerned in connection with Bhutahi P.S. Case No. 36 of 2025.



                                             (Shailendra Singh, J)
annu/-
U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…