Patna High Court
Munchun Kumar @ Bittu GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, finding no sufficient ground to deny it.
Summary
Munchun Kumar, also known as Bittu Gupta, was arrested in connection with a robbery and alleged violation of Section 27 of the Arms Act, based primarily on the confessional statement of a co‑accused, Deepak Kumar. The petitioner contended that he was not named in the FIR, had no criminal antecedents, and no incriminating material was recovered from his possession. He had been in custody since 5 July 2025 and pointed to the earlier grant of bail to a co‑accused on identical charges as a basis for parity. The State opposed bail, arguing that the confession implicated the petitioner. The Court, noting the filing of the charge sheet, the petitioner’s clean record, the lack of risk of evidence tampering, and the principle of parity, ordered his release on bail subject to standard conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner when the sole basis of accusation is a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
- Whether the filing of a charge sheet and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 309(6)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- confessional statement
- co‑accused
- Arms Act
- robbery
- parity
- charge sheet
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89218 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-307 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Munchun Kumar @ Bittu Gupta son of Mahendra Sah Resident of Village-
Jamunia Khairi Mal, Police Station-Pipra, District-East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pipra
P.S. Case No. 307/2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Section 309(6) B.N.S. and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, four miscreants looted a
sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (five lac) along with blank cheques and a
pass book from the car of the petitioner and fled away from the
place of occurrence. FIR has been lodged against unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in
the FIR. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has
been surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement
of co-accused Deepak Kumar. Except confessional statement of
co-accused, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89218 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
complicity of the present petitioner with the alleged occurrence.
The petitioner is languishing in custody since 05.07.2025 and
bears no criminal antecedent. The petitioner is not present at the
place of occurrence and no incriminating article has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He
orally submits that the petitioner was not identified by any
person. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is
no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. On
similar and identical allegation co-accused Ratnesh Kumar has
already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide Cr. Misc. No.87175/2025 and on the principle of parity the
petitioner also deserves same treatment.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that during course
of investigation the name of the petitioner surfaced in this case on
the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Deepak Kumar
and hence the petitioner does not deserve bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
period of custody, on similar and identical allegation co-accused
has already been granted bail, charge sheet has already been
submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with
the prosecution evidence and keeping in view clean antecedent of
petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89218 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
taking into consideration the material available on record, let the
petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M.,
Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No.
307/2025, 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.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
amitkumar/-
U T
Checking your session…