Patna High Court
Binod PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, finding insufficient direct evidence to justify continued detention.
Summary
The petitioner, Binod Paswan, was arrested in connection with a robbery case (PS Case No. 27/2021) involving theft of jewellery, cash and mobile phones. The FIR named unknown miscreants; the petitioner’s name surfaced only through the confessional statement of co‑accused Anuj Paswan, with no direct evidence, recovered articles, or a Turn‑over‑In‑Possession (T.I.P.) report. The petitioner, who has four prior criminal cases pending on bail, argued that he is innocent, that the charge sheet offers no material linking him to the offence, and that co‑accused Arjun Paswan and Bhutali Paswan were previously granted bail in a similar case (Cr. Misc. No.62833/2021). The State opposed bail, contending that the petitioner’s name emerged during investigation. Considering the lack of incriminating evidence, the principle of parity with the earlier bail orders, and the petitioner’s willingness to comply with conditions, the Court granted bail on a cash bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being implicated solely through a co‑accused’s confessional statement and having prior criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 380, 395, 457
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- robbery
- theft
- confessional statement
- parity
- antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89974 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2021 Thana- CHANDAUTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Binod Paswan S/O Ranjan Paswan @ Rajan Paswan R/O Village- Kasiyadih,
P.S- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gayaji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jai Narain Thakur
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Chandauti P.S. Case No. 27/2021 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 457, 380 and 395 of the B.N.S.
3. As per prosecution case, all the family members
went to sleep after taking the dinner. Upon hearing the noise, the
informant woke up and saw that 6-7 miscreants were present in the
house. On raising alarm, all the accused persons fled away. Some
gold and silver ornaments, two mobile phones and cash of
Rs.15,500/- were missing from the house, which were allegedly
looted by 6-7 unidentified miscreants. FIR has been lodged against
unknown.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offfence as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89974 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
alleged in the FIR. The petitioner is not named in the FIR and his
name surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement
of co-accused Anuj Paswan. Except confessional statement of co-
accused, there is nothing on record to demonstrate the complicity
of the present petitioner with the alleged occurrence. The
petitioner is languishing in custody since 01.11.2025 and bears
four criminal antecedents in which he is on bail. The petitioner is
not apprehended on the spot and no incriminating article has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. No T.I.P
has been conducted uptill now. The petitioner has been implicated
in this case just because he has four criminal antecedents. He
orally submits that 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 Arjun
Paswan and Bhutali Paswan have already been granted bail by the
co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No.62833/2021 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 and
therefore, he cannot escape from the allegation made in the FIR.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89974 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
period of custody, on similar and identical allegation co-accused
have already been granted bail, 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 bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
C.J.M., Gaya in connection with Chandauti P.S. Case No. 27/2021,
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…