Vikash Kumar @ Mohit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64270 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-73 Year-2025 Thana- AIRPORT District- Patna ====================================================== Vikash Kumar @ Mohit Yadav Son of Manoj Yadav Resident of VillageMeyar, P.S.- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Shashikant, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra, Sr. Advocate :

Mr. Aaysh Abhishek, Advocate :

Ms. Namrata Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, and learned Senior counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(3) and 61(2) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, Laxman Sadhu Sinde arrived at Patna Airport on 11.04.2025 and informed his wife that Shivraj Sagi would receive him and take him to Jharkhand. Later that night, he became unreachable and an unknown person briefly answered his phone stating he was in the bathroom, after which all contact was lost.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64270 of 2025(4) dt.16-02-2026 2/3 the First Information Report was lodged after delay of 12 days and yet the petitioner has not been named in the same. The First Information Report is not based on the statement of any eye-witness and the name of the petitioner has transpired during the course of investigation in the confessional statement of co-accused, Ranjeet Patel, before the police. It has been further submitted that one similarly situated co-accused person, namely Sachin Ranjan has been granted bail by the Court below itself (Annexure-P/2). The petitioner is in custody since 14.04.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted.

5. Learned APP for the State as well as learned Senior counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the grant of bail. It has been submitted on behalf of the informant that the charge-sheet was subsequently submitted under Section 103(1) and other Sections of the B.N.S. and the present act is that of organized crime and has further pointed out that the case of one similarly situated co-accused person, namely Kundan Kumar has also been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.56519 of 2025 and the considerations were absolutely similar to the present accused.

6. Taking into consideration the facts and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64270 of 2025(4) dt.16-02-2026 3/3 circumstances and considering the seriousness of the accusations, coupled with the fact that the bail application of similarly situated co-accused person has already been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected in connection with Hawai Adda P.S. No.73 of 2025.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) anand/- U T