Patna High Court
Dilkhush KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and conditions, as the evidence against him was insufficient and he was not named in the FIR.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilkhush Kumar, was arrested on 20 March 2025 in connection with a case involving alleged ransom demand, shooting, and theft, charged under Sections 309(4), 309(6), 109 of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution’s case is based solely on the confessional statements of co‑accused Halchal and Chandan Kumar, as the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR and no tip‑off or incriminating material has been recovered from him. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated and that the evidence against him is tenuous. The State opposed bail, highlighting seven prior criminal antecedents, though the petitioner is already on bail in six other cases with one pending. The court noted the lack of direct evidence, the absence of a TIP, and the petitioner’s non‑inclusion in the FIR, and consequently granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with specified conditions. The order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents but prohibited delay of bail on that ground.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the accused is not named in the FIR and the only evidence is the confessional statements of co‑accused.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 109, 309(4), 309(6)
Subjects
- bail
- confessional statement
- FIR
- criminal antecedents
- Arms Act
- ransom
- evidence
- TIP
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91489 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-163 Year-2024 Thana- Baijnathpur District- Saharsa
======================================================
Dilkhush Kumar S/O Amrendra Yadav R/O Village- Parsi ward No.-3, P.S-
Arar, Distt.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Randhir Kumar No 1, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 13-01-2026 Heard Mr. Randhir Kumar No.1, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
20.03.2025 in connection with Baijnathpur P.S. Case No. 163 of
2024, F.I.R. dated 28.12.2024 for the offences punishable under
Sections 309 (4), 309(6), 109 of the B.N.S. and section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
accused persons are alleged to have demanded ransom from the
informant and upon protest a gun shot injury to his brother on
his thigh and took out Rs. 18,000/- from the pocket of the
informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91489 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named
in the F.I.R. His name has been transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of apprehended accused persons namely,
Halchal and Chandan Kumar. The petitioner and Chandan
Kumar has been remanded in Pastpar P.S. Case No. 53/2024 on
28.12.2024 and he was remanded in the present case on
20.03.2025. The name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of apprehended co-accused namely,
Halchal and Chandan Kumar. Till date, no TIP has been
conducted and no incriminating material has been recovered
from the petitioner’s possession. The police after investigation,
submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is
in custody since 20.03.2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner carries seven 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
the six cases and one case is pending.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91489 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., the name of the petitioner
transpired on the basis of confessional statement of apprehended
co-accused persons, till date no TIP has been conducted, 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 J.M., Saharsa
in connection with Baijnathpur P.S. Case No. 163 of 2024, with
the other 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91489 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…