Patna High Court
Navab Jan @ Md. NavabversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted as the prosecution’s case rests solely on a co‑accused’s statement without any other substantive evidence, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Navab Jan was implicated in a theft case (FIR No. 137 of 2025) for allegedly snatching a mobile, charged under Sections 304(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The sole basis for his identification was a statement by an apprehended co‑accused, Rahul Kumar, with no other corroborative material. The petitioner contended innocence and argued that the prosecution’s case was weak, while the State highlighted three prior criminal antecedents, though the petitioner was already on bail for those matters. The court examined the sufficiency of evidence and the relevance of the prior offences, concluding that the lack of independent evidence warranted bail. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on bail of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and further safeguards regarding cooperation, non‑tampering, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the only incriminating material is a co‑accused's disclosure.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude bail in the present case.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Sec. 438(2) CrPC and Sec. 482(2) B.N.S. are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 304(2), 3(5)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- theft
- co‑accused testimony
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92084 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-137 Year-2025 Thana- GHOGHARDIHA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Navab Jan @ Md. Navab S/O Dilwar Husain @ Md. Dilavar Husain R/O
Village- Jahalipatti, P.S- Ghoghadiha, District- Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, Advocate
: Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Gagan Deo Yadav, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection
with Ghoghardiha P.S. Case No. 137 of 2025, F.I.R. dated
25.08.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 304(2) and
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the First Information Report, the informant
alleged that on 25.08.2025 at about 11:45 A.M when he was
returning to his home and reached near village Kishanpatti Bhutahi
Balan bridge, then the petitioner along with other co-accused
persons came, from behind, on motorcycles and one of them
snatched his mobile and fled away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92084 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
present case and his name transpired on the basis of disclosure
made by apprehended co-accused person, namely, Rahul Kumar
and except the disclosure made by apprehended co-accused
person, no other cogent material has come during investigation
which suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present
occurrence.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that the petitioner carries three criminal antecedents other
than the present one but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3
of the bail application that the petitioner is on bail in the said
matters.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and
the fact that the name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of
disclosure made by apprehended co-accused person, let the
petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before
the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of
receipt of the order, 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. 1 st Class, Jhanjharpur,
Madhubani in connection with Ghoghardiha P.S. Case No. 137 of
2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2)
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92084 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with 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 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 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 bond 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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.