Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80362 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-455 Year-2025 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Pintu Kumar S/o- Kameshar Chauhan @ Kameshwar Chaudhari VillDharampur PS-Phulwarisharif Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2026 Heard Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 09.08.2025 in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 455 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 08.08.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 109, 123, 303(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along with other accused persons have stolen the E-rickshaw of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80362 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026 2/3 F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner was initially not named in the F.I.R and name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation and the so called e-rickshaw was recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that there is non-compliance of Section 103 of the B.N.S.S and till date no T.I.P has been conducted by the prosecution and even the informant has not identified the petitioner as yet. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 09.08.2025.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent, informant has not identified the petitioner and till date no T.I.P has been conducted by the prosecution, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM-VII, Danapur, Patna in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 455 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80362 of 2025(4) dt.31-01-2026 3/3 i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T