Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, was arrested in connection with a theft of a pistol, a motorcycle and a laptop, for which an FIR was lodged against unknown persons under Section 309(4) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act. The petitioner contended that he had no involvement in the alleged offence, that no incriminating article was recovered from him, and that he possessed no criminal antecedent despite a clerical entry in the case diary. The State opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner had recovered the motorcycle and therefore posed a risk of tampering with evidence. The court examined the material on record, noting that a charge sheet had already been filed, there was no likelihood of evidence tampering, and the petitioner had no proven prior convictions. Accordingly, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding surety, cooperation with trial, non‑tampering, and an undertaking of clean antecedent. The petition was disposed in favour of the petitioner.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 309(4) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act considering the nature of the offence and alleged involvement.
  • Whether the petitioner’s alleged prior criminal antecedent, as recorded in the case diary, disqualifies him from bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Section 309(4)
  • Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
  • criminal antecedent
  • charge sheet
  • theft
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87596 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Nitish Kumar Son of Vishwanath Ray Resident of Village - Ajana, P.S.-
                 Kalyanpur, District - Samastipur.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Om Prakash Om, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Pushpa Sinha.1, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   09-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                    2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 58 of 2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Section 309(4) of the BNS.

                                    3. As per prosecution case, at the point of pistol,

                   informant’s motorcycle and his bag containing Laptop were

                   snatched by unknown miscreants and FIR was lodged against

                   three unknown persons.

                                    4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence as

                   alleged in the FIR. During the course of investigation, the name

                   of the petitioner has been transpired in this case, as mentioned in

                   impugned order. Petitioner is in custody since 03.09.2025 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87596 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                            2/4




          charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no

          likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. No

          incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of

          the petitioner. He further submits through para 3 of the instant

          petition that in para 142 of case diary, it has been mentioned that

          petitioner bears one criminal antecedent i.e. Samastipur (Town)

          P.S. Case No. 177 of 2025, as mentioned in impugned order, but

          he has clarified in para 3 of the instant petition that, indeed,

          petitioner has clean antecedent because of the fact that

          Samastipur (Town) P.S. Case No. 177 of 2025 is registered

          against unknown and nowhere and in no way at any stage the

          name of the petitioner has transpired in the said case. In this

          way, learned counsel for the petitioner has specifically

          submitted that petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, though

          impugned order denotes the criminal antecedent by mentioning

          para 142 of the case diary.

                          5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the

          prayer for bail of the petitioner by submitting that impugned

          order clearly reveals that at the instance of petitioner, the alleged

          motorcycle was recovered. Hence, petitioner does not deserve

          bail.

                          6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87596 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                            3/4




          case, period of custody, petitioner’s counsel has specifically

          asserted that petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, charge

          sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood

          of tampering with the prosecution evidence, argument advanced

          on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the

          material available on record, let the petitioner above named be

          released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees

          Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Samastipur in connection with

          Kalyanpur P.S. Case No.              58 of 2025, subject to following

          conditions:-

                          (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or

          mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn

          the affidavit in bail application.

                          (ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will

          remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive

          dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for

          cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

                          (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or

          the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

          move for cancellation of bail.

                          (iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87596 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
                                                         4/4




                       nature of offences in future, the learned trial court shall be at

                       liberty to cancel his bail bond.

                                       (v) Petitioner shall submit an undertaking before

                       the learned trial court that he bears no criminal antecedents and

                       if the said undertaking is found incorrect by the learned trial

                       court, his bail bond shall not be accepted.



                                               (Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
alok/-

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.