Patna High Court
Vinod PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to bail as he has a clean antecedent, no material recovered from his possession, and a co‑accused on similar charges has already been granted bail.
Summary
Vinod Pandit was arrested on 19 September 2025 in connection with an FIR alleging Naxal-related offences under Sections 308(3), 308(4), 308(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 16, 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The prosecution claimed that police, acting on secret information, discovered a black flag, threatening pamphlets and other material intended to create fear ahead of elections, and that the petitioner had confessed to involvement. The petitioner contended that he has a clean antecedent, was not named in the FIR, no incriminating material was recovered from his possession, and that the only link to him is a self‑confessional statement recorded in the case diary. The court noted the absence of material evidence, the petitioner’s clean record, and that a similarly situated co‑accused had already been granted bail. Consequently, the court granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence or witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and the UAPA.
- Whether a self‑confessional statement recorded in the case diary is sufficient to deny bail in the absence of material evidence.
- Whether the grant of bail to a co‑accused on similar charges influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 308(3), 308(4), 308(5), 61(2)
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 16, 17, 18, 20, 21
Subjects
- bail
- Naxal
- UAPA
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- criminal antecedent
- confession
- evidence
- political violence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91826 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2025 Thana- CHIHARA District- Jamui
======================================================
Vinod Pandit Son of Parmeshwar Pandit @ Permeshwar Pandit Resident of
Village- Bongi (Bougi), P.S.- Chihra, District- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 20-01-2026 Heard Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, learned counsel
for the petitioner as well as Mr. Pranav Kumar, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
19.09.2025 in connection with Chihra P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025,
F.I.R. dated 16.09.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 308(3), 308(4), 308(5), 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyay
Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 16, 17, 18,20, 21 of the Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act.
3. According to prosecution case, on secret
information regarding Naxal activities, police reached place of
occurrence and found black flag hoisted on the bamboo stick
foam plates, pamphlets written in red ink containing threats etc
and upon enquiry found that some naxalies have put the above
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91826 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
2/4
articles with intention to create obstruction in the upcoming
assembly election by creating fear among the villagers. Hence
the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation levelled against
the petitioner is false and fabricated and nothing has been
recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The
petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired
during investigation on the basis of suspicion and self-
confessional statement of the petitioner which is recorded in
paragraph-88 of case diary and and except the aforesaid, no
other cogent material has come during investigation which
suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present
occurrence and similarly situated co-accused person, namely,
Gajadhar Mandal has been granted the privilege of regular bail
by this Court vide order dated 19.01.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.
90877 of 2025. He further submits that the police after
investigation submitted the charge sheet and the petitioner is in
custody since 19.09.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91826 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
3/4
submits that petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present
occurrence.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and nothing recovered from the
conscious possession of the petitioner and similarly situated co-
accused person has been granted the privilege of regular bail
this Court, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-2nd, Jamui in
connection with Chihra P.S. Case No. 78 of 2025, 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91826 of 2025(2) dt.20-01-2026
4/4
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)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…