Allowed

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Paswan @ Rohit Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Feb 2026CR. MISC./8580/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 309(6) and 3(5) BNS alleging loot of a mobile and ATM card; petitioner claimed seizure witnesses were police and Section 105 BNSS was not complied with. Court enlarged the petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of SDJM, Araria.

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Paswan @ Rohit Paswan Vs The State… — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8580 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2025 Thana- MAHALGAON District- Araria

¶3

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

¶4

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Paswan @ Rohit Paswan S/o Late Manik Paswan @ Late Maniklal Paswan R/o Village - Matiyari Ward No. 10, P.S - Mahalgaon, District - Araria

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

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

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Rana, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 17-02-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶14

APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 309(6) & 3(5) of the BNS.

¶16

The case of the prosecution, in short, is that unknown miscreants have looted the mobile and ATM card of the informant.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was apprehended on suspicion and after that his confessional statement was recorded by police. It has further been submitted that one stolen mobile from the house of this petitioner was recovered. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8580 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 2/2

¶19

submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that the witnesses of the seizure list are police personnel and they have not complied Section 105 of the BNSS while making seizure. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 26.09.2025

¶20

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the bail and has submitted that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of two cases.

¶21

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 released on bail in connection with Mahalgaon P.S. Case No. 173 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Araria.

¶22

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶23

durgesh/-

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Paswan @ Rohit Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar @ Rohit Kumar Paswan @ Rohit Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash Raj Vs The State of Bihar

Govinda Sahani @ Govind Sahani @ Gobinda Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

Azad Kumar @ Azad Kumar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Sandeep Kumar @ Sandip Kumar @ Gobbar @ Gabbar Vs The State of Bihar

Kunal Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Hasmat Ansari Vs The State of Bihar