Patna High Court
Parsunna Kumar @ SonuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that, given the completed investigation, absence of flight risk, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the petitioners are entitled to bail.
Summary
The petitioners, three accused in a case registered under Sections 105 and 3(5) of the BNS for alleged involvement in a fatal assault, applied for bail. The prosecution alleged that the accused were caught at the scene of a robbery that led to a death, while the defence argued that the petitioners were falsely implicated and have no prior criminal record. The court noted that two co‑accused in the same case had already been released on bail and that the investigation was complete, eliminating any risk of evidence tampering or flight. Considering the nature of the offence, the lack of material to suggest a danger to justice, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the judge ordered bail. The bail was granted on a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and standard conditions, and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 105 and 3(5) of the BNS pending trial.
- Whether there is a likelihood of the accused tampering with evidence or fleeing from justice.
- Whether the grant of bail to co‑accused in the same case is a relevant factor for granting bail to the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 3(5)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 105
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 105 IPC
- Section 3(5) BNS
- flight risk
- evidence tampering
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91348 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-432 Year-2025 Thana- PATLIPUTRA District- Patna
======================================================
1. Parsunna Kumar @ Sonu S/o- Pramod Kumar Singh R/v- Vishal Ganga
Apartment, Flat No-205, Anandpuri, Boring Canal Road, Ps- S.K Puri Dist-
Patna
2. Kanhaiya Yadav S/o- Lakhandeo Yadav R/v- Itadh, W.No-3, Ps- Paithu Dist-
Aurangabad
3. Umesh Prasad S/o- Late Shiv Jatan Singh @ Jatan Singh R/v- Ekauna, Ps-
Bhagwanganj Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Varun Krishna Singh
Mr.Rajeev Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1. By means of this bail application, petitioners, who are
involved in connection with Patliputra P.S. Case No. 432 of
2025 registered for the offences under Sections 105/3(5) of the
BNS seek enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.
2. Heard Mr. Jitendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioners assisted by Mr. Varun Krishna Singh,
and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant Md.
Murshid Alam moved an application to the S.H.O. Patliputra
police station, Patna alleging therein inter alia that on 5.10.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91348 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/6
at 4.46 A.M. while he was on duty near Sai Mandir Patliputra,
he received information that one unknown person was being hit
by few people in the under construction building of G.S.Neuro
Science Hospital and when he reached there, he found that an
injured person was lying unconscious. After seeing the police,
some people ran away however, police stopped five named
accused persons including the petitioners. It is further alleged
that all five persons stated that the injured persons had entered
in the premises to commit theft. The injured was taken to
P.M.C.H. where he was declared dead.
4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioners that
petitioners are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in
this case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted by the
learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners that as per the
prosecution case, five persons, namely, Parsunna Kumar @
Sonu (petitioner No. 1), Kanhaiya Yadav (petitioner No. 2),
Umesh Prasad (petitioner No. 3) and two other co-accused
namely, Santosh Prasad and Ram Nivas Singh were
apprehended together and they were made accused in the
present case. Out of which, two persons, namely, Santosh Prasad
and Ram Nivas Singh have been granted bail by a co-ordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in Cr.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91348 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/6
Misc. No. 90780 of 2025 and the case of the present petitioners
are similar to that of co-accused Santosh Prasasd and Ram
Nivas Singh, therefore the petitioners are also entitled to be
released on bail. The petitioners have no criminal history.
Averments in this regard have been mentioned in paragraph no.
3 of the bail application. Several other submissions in order to
demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the
petitioners have also been placed forth before the Court. Lastly,
it is submitted that petitioners are languishing in jail since
05.10.2025. In case they are released on bail, they will not
misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.
5. Per contra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners reiterating the
prosecution case as mentioned in F.I.R. but he does not dispute
the factum of the case as argued on behalf of the petitioners.
6. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for
the parties and perused the record, I find that two accused
persons under similar accusation have been granted bail as
noted above. The investigation has been completed and charge-
sheet has been submitted against the petitioners. Now there is no
possibility of tampering the witnesses. Due to heavy docket of
the cases, the possibility of conclusion of trial of the petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91348 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/6
in near future is very bleak. There is no chance of the
petitioners, of fleeing away from the judicial process or
tampering with the prosecution evidence. As on date there is no
material on record to presume that there is danger, of course, of
justice being thwarted by grant of bail to the petitioners.
7. In view of the above, without entering into merit of the
case, keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence,
severity of punishment, complicity of the petitioners,
submissions of the learned counsel for the parties made at the
bar and reasons as noted above, this Court is of the opinion that
the petitioners are liable to be released on bail.
8. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioners
stands allowed.
9. Let the petitioners namely Parsunna Kumar @ Sonu,
Kanhaiya Yadav and Umesh Prasad be released on bail in the
aforesaid case on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees
Twenty Five Thousand only) each with two sureties in the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the
following conditions:-
(i) That the petitioners shall cooperate with the
expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the
Court unless inevitable. Two consecutive default in putting
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91348 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
5/6
appearance shall lead to an action towards cancellation of the
bail bond of the petitioners.
(ii) That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly
make any inducement, threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or
tamper with the evidence.
(iii) That the petitioners shall not directly or indirectly
involve in any criminal activity after being released on bail.
(iv) In case, at any stage it is found the petitioners have
disclosed their incomplete criminal history before this Court,
learned Court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the
petitioners have concealed criminal antecedents despite their
knowledge of the same.
(v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the Court below
that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned
Court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
10. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited
to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will
in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the
case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91348 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
6/6
independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected
by anything said in this order.
11. The trial Court shall make an endeavour to conclude
the trial of the petitioners expeditiously without granting
unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J)
Saif/-
U T
Checking your session…