Umesh Kumar @ Pawan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2848 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-385 Year-2025 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Umesh Kumar @ Pawan S/O Devendra Ram R/o - Dhangain, P.S - Bikramganj, District - Rohtas, Bihar 2.
Sushil Kumar S/O Sugriv Ram R/o - Dhangain, P.S - Bikramganj, District - Rohtas, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Uday Shankar Pandey, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Murli Dhar, APP For the informant :
Mr. Vinay Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 385 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 140(3) of the B.N.S and further added Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant had gone to her maternal home to attend a marriage ceremony. While returning from the said function on 04.06.2025, she learned that her son was not at home. Furthermore, she also came to know that Suraj Kumar (son of the informant) had been missing since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2848 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026 2/3 03.06.2025. Thereafter, she filed a missing report in the form of the present written report.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not named in the FIR and their names have transpired in this case merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Gautam Ram @ Suraj Kumar Bharti before the police and apart from this confession statement, there is no legal or tangible material against the petitioner on record. It has further been submitted that there is a delay of two days in lodging the FIR without giving any plausible reason for the same. It has also been submitted that the charge sheet has been filed against the petitioners and there is no allegation of tampering against them. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners have clean criminal antecedent and are in custody since 22.06.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is suspicion against the petitioners and the name of the petitioners surfaced during the course of the investigation.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2848 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026 3/3 parties and the nature of material against the petitioners, let the petitioners above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bailbonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Rohtas, in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 385 of 2025.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J) Jyoti/- U T