Allowed¶26

Vinay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

BAIL – regular bail granted

Patna HC13 Jan 2026CR. MISC./73220/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Cr. Misc. No. 73220 of 2025, decided 13-01-2026 by Ashok Kumar Pandey, J. — bail allowed under Section 379 IPC (theft); conditions under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C.; implication via disclosure of co-accused Dhiraj Kumar; no recovery; parity with co-accused Munna Kumar (Cr. Misc. No. 64245 of 2023); custody since 08.09.2025; four criminal antecedents flagged by APP; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two sureties before CJM, East Champaran at Motihari.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail: petitioner to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari, subject to the conditions in the order and Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. ¶26

Vinay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether Vinay Kumar, accused in Mehsi P.S. Case No. 101 of 2023 for theft punishable under Section 379 IPC, should be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Court's answer

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari, subject to conditions under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. and further conditions: one bailor to be a family member providing official document of bona fide; appearance before the Trial Court on every date, failure on two consecutive dates without plausible reason entailing cancellation by the Trial Court; monthly appearance before the concerned police station for one year to mark attendance; no inducement, promise or threat to witnesses or tampering with evidence; and desistance from committing any criminal offence, failing which the State may seek cancellation of bail bonds.

¶19

Key takeaways

The bail application stands allowed.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL — regular bail granted — offence under Section 379 IPC arising from Mehsi P.S. Case No. 101 of 2023 (alleged theft of Rs. 1,20,000/- and filling of a gallon at a petrol pump) — petitioner implicated on disclosure of apprehended co-accused Dhiraj Kumar; nothing recovered from him save, per defence, a confessional statement; in judicial custody since 08.09.2025; parity urged with co-accused Munna Kumar granted bail in Cr. Misc. No. 64245 of 2023; State opposed citing four criminal antecedents — Patna High Court (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J.) enlarged petitioner on bail on bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two like sureties to the CJM, East Champaran at Motihari, subject to Section 437(3) Cr.P.C. and additional conditions (family-member bailor with bona fide document; appearance on every trial date with default on two consecutive dates entailing cancellation; monthly police-station attendance for one year; no witness tampering; desistance from fresh offences).

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73220 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2023 Thana- MEHSI District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Vinay Kumar S/o- Suresh Rai @ Sudish Rai R/v- Pakadi Basarat PsSahebganj Dist- Muzaffarpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Priyesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 13-01-2026 Heard Mr. Priyesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No. 101 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

The case of the prosecution in short is that unknown miscreants has committed theft of Rs. 1,20,000/- and have also filled a gallon from the petrol pump.

¶15

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. He also submits that during the course of investigation, one Dhiraj Kumar was

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73220 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 2/3

¶17

apprehended, and Dhiraj Kumar has disclosed the name of this petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. Save and except the confessional statement, there is nothing against the petitioner. It has further been submitted that one co-accused namely, Munna Kumar, having a similar nature of allegation, has been granted bail by the learned coordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 64245 of 2023. He further submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 08.09.2025.

¶18

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of four cases.

¶19

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 of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with Mehsi P.S. Case No. 101 of 2023 subject to the following conditions as well as the conditions laid down under Section 437(3) of the Cr.P.C.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73220 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 3/3

¶21

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his bona fide;

¶22

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bonds by the Trial Court itself.

¶23

(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every month for one year to mark attendance;

¶24

(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds; and

¶25

(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.

¶26

With this observation, the bail application stands allowed.

¶27

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶28

Sudhanshu/-

¶29

U T

Vinay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pappu Yadav @ Rakesh Kumar Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar

Nandu Kumar @ Nandu Gupta Vs The State of Bihar

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Jay Prakash Ray @ Chhotaka @ Jay Prakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mohan Chaudhary @ Subhash Chaudhary @ Subhash Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Pintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar