Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court held that, due to the lack of material recovered from the petitioner and the police's failure to follow Section 105 of the B.N.S.S., the petitioner is entitled to bail.

Summary

Rahul Kumar was arrested in a case of stolen bicycles registered under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 338, 336(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that he was found with a seized bike but could not produce any documents for it, while the petitioner claimed he was an innocent passer‑by and that the main accused had fled. He further contended that the police seizure did not comply with Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. and that he had been in judicial custody since 21‑05‑2025. The State opposed bail, but the Court, after hearing both sides, found the petitioner’s claim credible and noted the procedural lapse in the seizure. Consequently, the Court ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The bail order was directed to be executed by the Judicial Magistrate‑FC, Motihari.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in the theft case.
  • Whether the police seizure complied with Section 105 of the B.N.S.S.
  • Whether the petitioner is a co‑accused or merely a passer‑by.

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 105, 317(2), 317(4), 336(3), 338, 3(5)

Subjects

  • bail
  • theft
  • stolen vehicle
  • police seizure
  • Section 105
  • judicial custody
  • East Champaran

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90581 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2025 Thana- Gadhiya Bazar District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Rahul Kumar, S/o- Jagarnath Das @ Jagarnath Das, R/v- Purani Bazar
                 Madhuban, P.s.- Madhuban, Dist- East Champaran
                                                                       ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                  Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, 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 bail in connection

                   with Garahiya Bazar P.S. Case No. 97 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 317(2), 317(4), 338, 336(3)

                   and 3(5) of B.N.S.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   police had information that certain accused were involved in

                   sale of stolen bikes. On this input, checking of the vehicle was

                   started. One bike was intercepted. It is alleged that one person

                   managed to flee away whereas the petitioner was apprehended

                   with a bike. The petitioner could not show the documents

                   regarding the bike.

                                 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90581 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

                       committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

                       case. It has further been submitted that actually the main

                       accused has fled away. Petitioner is only the passerby. Nothing

                       has been recovered from his possession. It has also been

                       submitted that witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel.

                       Police has not followed Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. while

                       making the seizure. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody

                       since 21.05.2025.

                                    5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

                       vehemently opposed the application for 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 enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                       bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties

                       of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                       Magistrate-F.C., Motihari, East Champaran in connection with

                       Garahiya Bazar P.S. Case No. 97 of 2025.


                                                        (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.