Sunil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20932 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-534 Year-2025 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Sunil Kumar Son of Prakash Choudhary @ Jay Prakash Choudhary Resident of village - Govindpur (Fatuha) Maharani Chowk, P.S.- Fatuha, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 534 of 2025 lodged on 25.11.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 331(4), 305(a) & 317(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the court of C.J.M., Biharsharif, Nalanda.

3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against 4 unknown accused persons. It has been alleged that four unknown persons came to the informant's house, committed theft, and took away gold and silver ornaments. However, they were seen in the CCTV footage.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20932 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that in the FIR, recovery has alleged to be made from the possession of different accused persons and not from the petitioner's possession. He submits that name of petitioner has come in this case only on the basis of a confessional statement of the accused persons. The defence has been taken by the petitioner is that he is the owner of safari vehicle and he used the said vehicle as driver also. He also submits that the petitioner has given his vehicle on rent and he was completely unaware about the recovered articles. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 01.12.2025, having clean antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the Sessions Court has rejected the bail application of the petitioner after perusal of the case diary in which, it has come that on the confessional statement of the accused persons including the petitioner, the police recovered the stolen gold in a melted form from the shop of one of the co-accused.

6. At this juncture, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20932 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026 3/3 the petitioner is hereby rejected with liberty that he may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T