Patna High Court

Randhir Kumar @ Randhir Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 March 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Randhir Kumar, sought regular bail in a case registered under sections 392, 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged robbery and assault. The prosecution alleged that unknown miscreants, later identified a co‑accused named Rahul, had snatched a van key and assaulted an informant. The petitioner contended innocence, pointing out a ten‑day delay in lodging the FIR and the absence of any material recovered from him, while noting that the co‑accused had already been granted bail. The court considered the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s clean record, and the fact that he had been in judicial custody since 10‑10‑2025. After hearing both sides, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the FIR being lodged ten days after the alleged incident
Whether the confessional statement of a co‑accused suffices to justify continued detention of the petitioner
Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedents and the absence of seized material warrant bail

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 392, 395, 412

Subjects

regular bail
Indian Penal Code
section 392
section 395
section 412
delay in FIR
confessional statement
criminal antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88921 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-564 Year-2022 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Randhir Kumar @ Randhir Kumar Sah Son of Ram Prakash Sah Village
                 -Bedaul Aadam PS- Purnahiya Dist- Sheohar

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Parmanand Pd. Nr. Sahi, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   10-03-2026                     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 392, 395

                   and 412 of Indian Penal Code.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that 3-4 unknown

                   miscreants have intercepted the informant and on the point of

                   pistol, snatched the key of the informant’s van and assaulted

                   him. They have fled from there.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the

                   FIR, it is clear that the date of occurrence is of 08.08.2022

                   whereas the FIR was lodged on 18.08.2022. There is delay of 10
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88921 of 2025(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                            2/3




          days in lodging the FIR without explaining the same. The FIR

          was lodged against unknown miscreants and during course of

          investigation, one Rahul was apprehended and he has given his

          confessional statement and in his confessional statement, he has

          named this petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the

          possession of this petitioner. No TIP has been conducted.

          Learned counsel has further submitted that co-accused Rahul

          Kumar has been granted bail by learned co-ordinate Bench of

          this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 50892 of 2023. Other co-accused

          persons have also been granted bail by learned co-ordinate

          Benches of this Court Vide Annexure P/3 series to this petition.

          A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the

          petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, he is

          languishing in judicial custody since 10.10.2025.

                       5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

          vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the 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

          Kati P.S. Case No. 564 of 2022 on furnishing bail bond of

          Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88921 of 2025(3) dt.10-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

                      Muzaffarpur.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
shubham/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…