Patna High Court
Anand KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Anand Kumar was arrested in connection with the alleged theft of a mobile phone and charged under section 304 of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s case relied on a confessional statement by co‑accused Vishal Kumar, who named the petitioner, but no material was recovered from the petitioner’s possession. The petitioner asserted his innocence, highlighted the absence of any criminal antecedent, and pointed out that he had been in judicial custody since 7 August 2025. The State opposed the grant of regular bail. After hearing both sides, the Court found the petitioner’s position stronger and ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner under section 304 of the B.N.S. in view of the co‑accused’s confessional statement and lack of material evidence against him.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 304
Subjects
- regular bail
- section 304
- co‑accused confession
- judicial custody
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89351 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-466 Year-2025 Thana- RUPASPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Anand Kumar S/o Arun Paswan R/o Village- Rukanpur, P.S- Rupaspur, Dist-
Patna, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 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 section 304 of the
B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the mobile of the
informant was snatched by unknown miscreants.
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 during
investigation, one Vishal Kumar 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 the petitioner. Save and except
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89351 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/2
the confessional statement of co-accused, there is nothing
against him. It has further been submitted that from whose
possession, mobile has been recovered, has been granted bail by
this Court vide order dated 11.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
83854 of 2025. The case of this petitioner stands on better
footing. 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 07.08.2025.
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
Rupaspur P.S. Case No. 466 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-II, Danapur/Concerned Court.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…