Uday Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 21-01-2026

¶12

Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for

¶13

the petitioner and Mr. Parmanand Prasad, learned APP for the State.

¶14

Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 28.05.2025, in connection with Piplawan P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 04.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2)/87 of the B.N.S.,2023.

¶15

Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons have kidnapped the daughter of the informant.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77479 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 2/3

¶18

petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. and he has been made accused merely on the ground that he is father of co-accused Saurabh Kumar and the main allegation of kidnappning is against co-accused Saurabh Kumar. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 28.05.2025.

¶19

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and he has been made accused merely on the ground that he is father of main accused Saurabh Kumar, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. IV, Danapur, Patna in connection with Piplawan P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

¶21

(1) 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

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77479 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 3/3

¶23

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

¶24

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶25

(3) 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 antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.

¶26

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶27

Ibrar//-

¶28

U T

Uday Sharma v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Uday Sharma 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

Vinod Pandit Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Singh Vs The Union of India through Narcotic Control Bureau, Patna

Ravish Kumar @ Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Gora Sajan Basfor @ Sajan Basfor @ Gore Basfor Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Chunchun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar