Bhushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 May 2025CR. MISC./25342/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail allowed; Section 392 IPC; loot/robbery; prosecution relying on confessional statement before police; second/renewed bail application after earlier rejection with liberty to renew post framing of charge; custody since 03.12.2024; charges framed 19.03.2025; parity with co-accused Sanjay Rai @ Sanjay Yadava; separate recovery case Muffasil P.S. Case No. 536 of 2021; Motihari Mufassil, East Champaran; bail bond Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties; Patna High Court Crl. Misc./Cr. Misc.; judge Shailendra Singh; decided 05-05-2025.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner Bhushan Kumar enlarged on regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 527 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. ¶¶17

Bhushan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, in custody since 03.12.2024 in Muffasil P.S. Case No. 527 of 2021 (Section 392 IPC), deserves to be enlarged on regular bail in his second bail application.

¶¶11

Court's answer

Given the petitioner's custody period, and the fact that on his alleged involvement in the loot the prosecution relies mainly on the confessional statement of the petitioner and a co-accused given before police, this is a fit case for bail; petitioner to be enlarged on bail on a bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

¶¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Cr. Misc. No.25342 of 2025, decided 05-05-2025, Shailendra Singh, J) granted regular bail to Bhushan Kumar, accused in Muffasil P.S. Case No. 527 of 2021 (East Champaran) registered for an offence under Section 392 IPC. Second bail application: the first prayer was rejected on 05.03.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 11647 of 2025 with liberty to renew after framing of charge, which occurred on 19.03.2025 when charges were framed and trial began. Granting bail, the court weighed mainly the petitioner's custody since 03.12.2024 and the plea that, for the alleged loot, the prosecution relies chiefly on confessional statements of the petitioner and a co-accused made before the police; submissions also noted parity with co-accused Sanjay Rai @ Sanjay Yadava bailed on 07.03.2025, absence of incriminating recoveries from the petitioner in this case (firearm/stolen-motorcycle recoveries falling under a separate case, Muffasil P.S. Case No. 536 of 2021, in which he already had bail), and dim prospects of early trial completion. Enlargement ordered on a bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25342 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-527 Year-2021 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Bhushan Kumar, S/o Harendra Rai R/o Village- Sihuliya, P.S.- Muffasil, District- East Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 05-05-2025

¶10

Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pranav Kumar, learned APP for the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 527 of 2021 dated 27.09.2021 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

The main submissions advanced by the petitioner's counsel are that it is second attempt of the petitioner to get relief of bail and his first prayer was rejected by then co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 05.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11647 of 2025 and the petitioner was given a liberty to renew his prayer after framing of charge upon him and in the light of the said liberty, he has renewed his prayer, the petitioner

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25342 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 2/3

¶14

has been languishing in jail since 03.12.2024 and one similarly situated co-accused namely, Sanjay Rai @ Sanjay Yadava has been granted bail by the co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 07.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 89158 of 2024. It is further submitted that after the petitioner was taken into custody in the present matter, no incriminating material connecting him to the alleged occurrence was recovered from his possession and in respect of petitioner's involvement in the alleged offence of loot, the prosecution is mainly relying upon the confessional statement of this petitioner and co-accused given before police, except this, there is no other material against him. It is further submitted that petitioner's trial has started and upon him the charges have been framed on 19.03.2025 and there is less possibility of completion of petitioner's trial in near future. It is lastly submitted that though during the investigation, the petitioner was allegedly apprehended with firearm and motorcycle which was suspected to be stolen but regarding that recoveries another P.S. Case bearing Muffasil P.S. Case No. 536 of 2021 was registered in which the petitioner has got bail.

¶15

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioner.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25342 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 3/3

¶17

In the facts and circumstances of this case as well as considering the aforesaid submissions and mainly the petitioner's custody period and also his the plea that in respect of petitioner's involvement in the alleged loot, the prosecution is mainly relying upon the confessional statement of this petitioner and co-accused given before the police, in my opinion, it is a fit case for bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be enlarged on bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 527 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

¶18

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶19

Rajiv/-

¶20

U T

Bhushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhushan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bali Chaudhary @ Baliram Choudhary @ Banki Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Zuber Malik @ Zubair Malik Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar Singh @ Chandan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Samirullah Dewan Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kishore Thakur @ Raj Kishore Sharma Vs The State of Bihar