Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sintu Kumar @ Sittu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Sintu Kumar, was arrested on 13 February 2025 in connection with a FIR dated 25 December 2024 alleging offences under Sections 132 and 109(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 and Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26, 35 and 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution’s case is based solely on the identification made by a co‑accused who was apprehended, with no material recovered from the petitioner’s possession. The petitioner contended that the allegations are fabricated and that there is no substantive evidence linking him to the crime. The State opposed bail, highlighting six prior criminal antecedents, though the petitioner was already on bail in one case and the others were pending. The Court, considering the lack of direct evidence and the circumstances of the identification, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing conditions of trial cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses, and verification of criminal antecedents.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate bail disposition when the accusation rests solely on a co‑accused’s disclosure and no material has been recovered from the petitioner?
  • Do the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail in the present case?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal antecedents
  • Arms Act
  • Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
  • co‑accused identification
  • trial cooperation

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90781 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-331 Year-2024 Thana- CHAUSA District- Madhepura
                 ======================================================
                 Sintu Kumar @ Sittu Kumar S/o- Sri Deepnarayan Yadav Resident of village-
                 Rasulpur Dhuriya Ward No 11 PS- Chousa Distt- Madhepura

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   13-01-2026                      Heard Mr. Sanjiv Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned Additional Public

                   Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   13.02.2025 in connection with Chousa P.S. Case No. 331 of

                   2024, F.I.R. dated 25.12.2024 for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 132, 109(1) of the BNS, 2023 and Section 25(1-B)(a),

                   26, 35 and 27 of the Arms Act.

                               3.      According to prosecution case, police got

                   information that the accused persons who were also made

                   accused in Chousa P.S. Case No. 233 of 2023 in a crime of

                   murder were hiding in the house of co-accused, Rupesh Yadav

                   and Rahul Yadav and when the police reached there, then all the

                   accused persons including this petitioner got successful in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90781 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                            2/4




          escaping from there except one Rahul Kumar who disclosed the

          name of the petitioner.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the

          present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and

          fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

          alleged in the F.I.R. and his name has been transpired on the

          basis of the disclosure made by the apprehended co-accused,

          namely, Rahul Kumar and recovery has been made from the co-

          accused, Rahul Kumar and Rupesh Yadav. As per the allegation

          in the F.I.R the petitioner escaped from the place of occurrence.

          Except the aforesaid no other cogent material has come during

          investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in

          the present occurrence. He further submits that the police after

          investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner.

          The petitioner is in custody since 13.02.2025.

                      5.    Learned       Additional       Public   Prosecutor   has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the

          ground that petitioner carries six criminal antecedents other than

          the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in

          one case and rest cases are pending for consideration before the

          competent court of law.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90781 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                            3/4




                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          that the name of the petitioner has been transpired on the

          disclosure made by the apprehended co-accused person, nothing

          has been recovered from the conscious possession of the

          petitioner as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above

          named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional

          Sessions Judge-IX, Madhepura in connection with Chousa P.S.

          Case No. 331 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:-

                       i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

          properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

          and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

          on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                       ii. 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.

                       iii. And further condition that the court below shall

          verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

          any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

          criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90781 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
                                                        4/4




                      cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-

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.