Patna High Court
Arun KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a cash bond, sureties and specific conditions.
Summary
Arun Kumar was arrested in connection with a robbery during which a finance company's collection agent was assaulted and valuables were stolen. The police allege that Kumar acted as a 'liner' in the robbery and that charas and firearms were recovered from a co-accused's house, leading to charges under Sections 8 and 20(B)(ii)(c) of the NDPS Act and Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. Kumar contended that he was innocent, had no contraband recovered from him, and was implicated only due to animosity, also noting his prolonged pre‑trial detention since September 2025. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and Kumar's two prior criminal antecedents. The Patna High Court, after considering the facts and the petitioner’s claim of innocence, granted bail on the condition of a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed several conditions to ensure cooperation with the investigation and trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a case involving offences under the NDPS Act and Arms Act despite alleged involvement in a robbery and prior criminal antecedents
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of innocence and lack of direct recovery of contraband justify bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act — s. 20(B)(ii)(c), 8
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Arms Act
- robbery
- criminal antecedents
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91624 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Arun Kumar S/o Shambhu Yadav @ Shambhu Prasad @ Umesh Kumar R/o
Village- Dharhari, P.S-Chiraiya, District-East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with NDPS
G.R. Case No. 36 of 2025, arising out of Mufassil P.S. Case No.
123 of 2025 dated 27.02.2025, registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 8 and 20(B)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act and
Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per allegation, co-accused, Amit Thakur and
Aditya Kumar @ Ripu Singh have committed robbery against a
collection agent of a finance company worth Rs. 1,35,550/-,
Samsung mobile and other articles and in that commission of
the offence, the petitioner was doing work of a Liner. It is
further case of the police that the weapon, used in the accident,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91624 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
was kept in the house of co-accused, Shalu @ Vishal. Hence, the
police conducted raid into the house of co-accused, Shalu @
Vishal and recovered 1 Kg 544 gm of charas and arms and
ammunition.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that there is no recovery of any
contraband (charas) from the petitioner. Only allegation against
the petitioner is that he was doing work of a Liner in the
commission of robbery. He further submits that the petitioner is
no way involved in the alleged offence and his name has been
taken by the co-accused person only on account of animosity.
5. He further submits that the petitioner has been
languishing in jail since 20.09.2025.
6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has two criminal antecedents.
7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has moved this Court earlier either for
anticipatory bail or regular one.
8. However, learned APP for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91624 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
and nature of allegation against the petitioner, this application
is allowed, directing the petitioner, above-named, to be enlarged
on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000 /-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned concerned Court below in connection
with NDPS G.R. Case No. 36 of 2025, arising out of Mufassil
P.S. Case No. 123 of 2025, on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner will make himself available for
interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required.
(ii) The petitioner will undertake that
investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his
absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police
or the court whenever his presence is required.
(iii) The petitioner 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.
(iv) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court
below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents other than
the disclosed one, learned court below shall cancel the bail
bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied
that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents despite
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91624 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
his 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 petitioner.
(Jitendra Kumar, J)
shoaib/-
U T
Checking your session…