Patna High Court
CR. MISC./28645/2026 of Pushkar Pandey Vs The State of Bihar on 10 June 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28645 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-605 Year-2020 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran ====================================================== Pushkar Pandey son of Shashi Shekhar Pandey Resident of Village -Basahi PS- Janta Bazar Dist -Saran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28645 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-605 Year-2020 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran ======================================================
Pushkar Pandey son of Shashi Shekhar Pandey Resident of Village -Basahi PS- Janta Bazar Dist -Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr.Udai Shankar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bhanu Pratap Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
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
10-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Petitioner along with other accused persons are said to have snatched away the motorcycle of the informant on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the First Information Report was lodged against unknown and the name of the petitioner transpired during the course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co- accused Ranjeet Kumar Singh made in another case. However, the said co-accused Ranjeet Kumar Singh was granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 08.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 70903 of 2024. It is Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28645 of 2026(3) dt.10-06-2026
further submitted that no recovery was made from the possession of the petitioner or from his house. As a matter of fact, the petitioner was also put on TIP but the informant failed to identify him which fact has been brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit. It has also been submitted that the petitioner has been made an accused in this case only on account of his criminal antecedents but the fact remains that although he was behind bars from 12.01.2021 to 14.01.2025 in other cases but during the said period, the police neither made any enquiry about the petitioner nor ever visited his house during the course of investigation of the present case, as stated in para-13 of the petition. Petitioner is now in custody since 16.02.2026 and charge-sheet has already been submitted.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for bail on the ground of antecedents of the petitioner. However, it has been submitted that he has been granted bail in all the other cases.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances and also considering the fact that the implication of the petitioner is based only on confessional statement of the co- accused before the police having no evidentiary value, coupled with the fact that the charge-sheet has already been submitted, Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28645 of 2026(3) dt.10-06-2026
let the above named petitioner, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 605 of 2020, subject to the conditions that: (I) One of the bailors would be the close relative preferably the uncle of the petitioner who has affidavited the present petition. (II) The petitioner would appear on each and every date fixed in the case and if the petitioner does not appear on even a single date without any substantial and satisfactory reason, the learned court below would be at liberty to cancel his bail bonds.
devendra/- (Soni Shrivastava, J) U T