Patna High Court
Amrendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted and dismissed the petitioner's bail application.
Summary
Amrendra Kumar applied for regular bail under section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in a robbery case where he was alleged to have looted an informant and his wife with a pistol. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, that no incriminating article was recovered from him, and that he had been in custody since 13 August 2025. The State contended that the petitioner’s wife identified him from a photograph taken during his custody and that he confessed to the crime. After hearing counsel for both sides, the Court considered the FIR allegations and the material gathered during investigation. The Court found the identification and alleged confession sufficient to deny bail and rejected the petitioner's application, allowing him to renew the bail prayer after completing one year in custody.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted under section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the alleged robbery and confession
- Whether the identification by the victim’s wife and the alleged confession constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- Section 309(4)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- robbery
- false implication
- confession
- identification
- High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88113 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Amrendra Kumar Son of Vishishth Narayan Singh @ Vishishth Kumar R/O
Village - Gaddopur, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Mahua P.S. Case no. 142
of 2025 registered under section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, three accused persons
on a point of pistol looted the informant as also his wife of their
belongings as stated in the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of his
antecedents. No incriminating article has been recovered from his
possession and he is in custody since 13.8.2025. Chargesheet has
been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88113 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/2
for the State who submits that the wife of the petitioner who was
also looted when the occurrence was given effect to identified
the petitioner on seeing his photograph on which the petitioner
was taken into custody and he confessed to his crime.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR and the
material that has transpired in course of investigation, the Court
is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is
rejected.
7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his
prayer for bail after completing one year in custody.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.