Patna High Court
CR. MISC./57867/2026 of Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 19 August 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57867 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2026 Thana- Patauna District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1. Sunil Kumar S/o Kashi Sunar @ Kashi Kant Thakur R/o Village- Kathaila, PS- Patauna, Distt-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57867 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2026 Thana- Patauna District- Madhubani ======================================================
1.
Sunil Kumar S/o Kashi Sunar @ Kashi Kant Thakur R/o Village- Kathaila, PS- Patauna, Distt- Madhubani
2.
Kashi Sunar @ Kashikant Thakur S/o Prabodh Thakur R/o Village- Kathaila, PS- Patauna, Distt- Madhubani
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Ratnakar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
19-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioners seek bail in connection with Patauna P.S. Case No. 82 of 2026, registered for the offences under Sections 137(2), 139(1), 140(3), 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, the complainant/informant lodged a case for kidnapping of his minor son by the petitioners and other coaccused persons.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The true fact of the case is that the petitioners have been living in Punjab and earning their livelihood. Seeing their income, the complainant/informant requested the petitioners to take her son to Punjab for employment and accordingly the son of the complainant/informant was taken to Punjab by the petitioners. However, some dispute arose between the parties over the wages of the victim and taking advantage of the situation, the informant falsely roped the petitioners in this false case with a view to extort money. The prosecution story is completely unbelievable that the victim was recovered and thereafter again handed over to the petitioners by the police. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS but it is at the instigation of the informant. The allegation of threat by the petitioners and the petitioners forcing the victim for selling ganja is not believable and there is no material to show any such act on the part of the petitioners. The petitioners are in custody since 18.04.2026. Charge sheet has been submitted. The petitioner no. 01 is having clean antecedent and petitioner no. 02 is having antecedent of one case.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioners. Learned A.P.P.
submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioners that they kidnapped the minor son of the informant.
6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the doubtful nature of allegation against the petitioners and also considering their period of custody and submission of charge sheet, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC, Benipatti, Madhibani/concerned court, in connection with Patauna P.S. Case No. 82 of 2026, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial court.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
Anuradha/- (Arun Kumar Jha, J) U T