Pintu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86627 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2024 Thana- BARBIGHA District- Sheikhpura

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

PINTU KUMAR Son of Late Vinod Ray Resident of Village- Visunpur, P.S.Akilpur, District- Patna, Bihar . At Present R/o Village- Sultanpur Near Police Chaoki, P.S.- Danapur, District- Patna, Bihar

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ravi Kant Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 13-01-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under section 309 (4) of the BNS, 2023.

¶15

3. The case of the prosecution is that unknown miscreants looted a sum of Rs. 25,44,275/- from the Axix Bank, Barbigha Branch, at gunpoint.

¶16

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the First Information Report was lodged against unknown miscreants. During the course of investigation, one Ghanshyam

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86627 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 2/3

¶18

Bharti was apprehended who gave his confessional statement wherein the name of this petitioner has surfaced. It is further submitted that the said Ghanshyam Bharti also named Satrughan Kumar and the petitioner has also given his confessional statement. It is contended that nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of this petitioner and save and except the confessional statement of co-accused and this petitioner, there is no material on record to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence. It is further submitted that similarly situated coaccused persons, namely Ghanshyam Bharti @ Chhotan and Satrughan Kumar @ Satrudhan Kumar have extended the privilege of bail vide orders dated 01.11.2025 and 10.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 72063 of 2025 and 62978 of 2025. The case of this petitioner stands on similar footing. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.01.2025.

¶19

5. Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

¶20

6. Considering the aforesaid 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 Sessions Trial No. 119 of 2025 arising out of Barbigha P.S. Case No. 177 of 2024 on furnishing bail

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86627 of 2025(2) dt.13-01-2026 3/3

¶22

bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sheikhpura/concerned Court.

¶23

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶24

Jagdish/-

¶25

U S

Pintu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu 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

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

Vinay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar