Jay Prakash Vs The State of Bihar

with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32832 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2026 Thana- NTPC District- Patna ====================================================== Jay Prakash S/O - Mahesh Ram R/O vill - Ramnagar, P.S - NTPC, Dist- Patna

¶11

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶12

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32706 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Rina Sinha, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32832 of 2026) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

¶13

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 13-05-2026

¶16

Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, learned counsel

¶17

for the petitioners and Ms. Rina Sinha and Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶18

Petitioners seeks bail who are in custody since 26.02.2026 in connection with NTPC P.S. Case No. 12 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 02.02.2026 for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of the BNS, 2023.

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32706 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 2/3

¶20

According to prosecution case, two unknown miscreants cut the rope of the truck and opened the Tirpal and committed theft of the valuable goods kept inside the truck.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that petitioners were initially not named in the FIR and their name has been transpired on the basis of the confessional statement of the coaccused person and thereafter, the petitioner, namely, Jay Prakash has confessed his guilt in the present occurrence and except the aforesaid, nothing has come during investigation which suggest the involvement of the petitioners in the present occurrence. The petitioners are in custody since 26.02.2026.

¶22

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners on the ground that petitioner, namely, Ravi Kumar carries three criminal antecedents and petitioner, namely, Jay Prakash carries one criminal antecedent other than the present one but fairly submits that they are on bail in all the pending matters.

¶23

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32706 of 2026(2) dt.13-05-2026 3/3

¶25

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM-I, Barh, Patna in connection with NTPC P.S. Case No. 12 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:-

¶26

i. Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶27

ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶28

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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.

¶29

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶30

Vanisha/-

¶31

U T

Jay Prakash v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay Prakash 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

Rajeev Kumar Jha @ Rajeev Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Aukar Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Shankar Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Kavita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Dagru Kale Vs The State of Bihar

Chhotu Chaudhary @ Chhotu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar