Patna High Court

Parshuram KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 29 January 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner, directing the execution of a bail bond with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Parshuram Kumar, a tempo driver, was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 309(3) and 309(4) of the B.N.S., alleging that he stole a mobile phone, a gold ring and cash from an informant and assaulted him. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated because the informant had not paid him for rides and that the seizure list attached to the FIR lacked his signature and was prepared by police officers, violating Section 105 of the B.N.S.S. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the procedural deficiencies in the seizure and noted the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and his continued custody since July 2025. Considering these factors, the Court decided to enlarge the petitioner on bail, subject to a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties. The order directs the bail to be effected before the Judicial Magistrate of Lakhisarai.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 309(3) and 309(4) of the B.N.S.
Whether the seizure of alleged stolen property complied with Section 105 of the B.N.S.S.
Whether the petitioner poses a flight risk or a risk of tampering with evidence

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 309(3), 309(4)
B.N.S.S. — s. 105

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
seizure
procedural irregularities
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91950 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- MEDNI CHAUKI District- Lakhisarai
                 ======================================================
                 Parshuram Kumar, S/O Suresh Yadav, R/O Village- Abgil Husaina, Thana,
                 P.S- Medni Chowki, Dist.- Lakhisarai.


                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar


                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Pramod Kumar Yadav, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Mednichowki P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 309(3) and 309(4) of B.N.S.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner is a tempo driver. The informant boarded in the tempo

                   and it is alleged that petitioner took the tempo on a secluded

                   place, snatched the mobile, gold ring and Rs. 12,000/- cash from

                   the informant. It is also alleged that petitioner has assaulted the

                   informant.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91950 of 2025(2) dt.29-01-2026
                                            2/3




          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. It has further been submitted that the fact is that the

          informant whose granny’s house is in the village of this

          petitioner used to travel on his tempo but she did not pay any

          penny to the petitioner and when the petitioner demanded his

          arrear, this case has been filed with a view of harass him. It has

          also been submitted that though, a seizure list is annexed with

          the F.I.R. but from perusal of the seizure list it is clear that the

          witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and it does not

          contain the signature of the petitioner whereas all the seizure is

          shown to be made from his possession. It has also been

          submitted that police has not followed Section 105 of the

          B.N.S.S. while making the seizure. Petitioner is having no

          criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody

          since 15.07.2025.

                       5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

          vehemently opposed the application for bail.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

          inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

          petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91950 of 2025(2) dt.29-01-2026
                                                         3/3




                       of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                       Magistrate       1st    Class,     Lakhisarai        in   connection   with

                       Mednichowki P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025.


                                                        (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…