Patna High Court
Modi Kumar @ ModiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted because the charge rested solely on a co‑accused’s confession and no material was recovered from the petitioner, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioners sought bail in a theft case (Shivajinagar P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025) where Modi Kumar was alleged to have participated based on a co-accused's confessional statement. The petitioners argued that the allegation was fabricated, no material was recovered from Modi Kumar, and he was not named in the FIR. The prosecution opposed bail, citing six prior criminal antecedents, but noted that Modi Kumar was already on bail in other pending matters. The court allowed the withdrawal of the bail application of co‑petitioner Praveen Mandal and dismissed it, permitting a fresh application. Considering the lack of direct evidence against Modi Kumar and the reliance on a co‑accused's confession, the court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to Modi Kumar despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under Sections 331(4), 305 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the confession of a co‑accused alone suffices to justify continued detention.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 305, 331(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- theft
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- withdrawal of application
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91444 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2025 Thana- SHIVAJINAGAR District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Modi Kumar @ Modi S/o Hirki Mandal R/o Village- Rajaur Dumra Moin,
Ram Bhadarpur, P.S - Sivajee Nagar, District - Samastipur
2. Praveen Mandal S/o Suchai Mandal R/o Village- Rajaur Dumra Moin, Ram
Bhadarpur, P.S - Sivajee Nagar, District - Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Choudhary Shyam Nandan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 22-01-2026 Heard Mr. Choudhary Shyam Nandan, learned
counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. After some arguments, learned counsel for the
petitioners seek permission to withdraw the bail application on
behalf of the petitioner no. 2, namely, Pravin Mandal.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. Accordingly, the bail application on behalf of
petitioner no. 2, namely, Pravin Mandal, is dismissed as
withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh application.
5. Office is directed to handover the certified copy of
the impugned order as well as certified copy of the FIR to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91444 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
2/4
learned counsel for the petitioners.
6. Now this application survives only for petitioner
no. 1, namely, Modi Kumar @ Modi.
7. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
04.09.2025 in connection with Shivajinagar P.S. Case No. 59 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 03.09.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 331(4), 305, 3(5) of the B.N.S.
8. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
co-accused persons are alleged to have committed theft in the
house of the informant and many articles including Rs. 40,000/-
cash was looted.
9. 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 FIR is false and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The
name of the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of apprehended co-accused person,
namely, Ritik Raushan. Nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner and till date no TIP has
been conducted by the prosecution. The Police after
investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91444 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
3/4
the petitioner is in custody since 04.09.2025.
10. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries
six more criminal antecedents other than the present one but
fairly submits on the basis of paragraph 3 of the bail petition
that the petitioner is on bail in all the pending matters.
11. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and also the fact that the name of petitioner has been transpired
on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, namely,
Ritik Raushan and nothing has been recovered from the
conscious possession of this petitioner, 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 A.C.J.M., 1st , Rosera,
Samastipur, in connection with Shivajinagar P.S. Case No. 59 of
2025, with 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 her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91444 of 2025(3) dt.22-01-2026
4/4
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
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)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…