SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4548

PATNA HIGH COURT
Rajesh Kumar Verma, J
Uday Sharma – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77479 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha
For the Respondents: Mr. Parmanand Prasad

The court emphasized that mere familial ties to an accused do not constitute sufficient grounds for denying bail.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The court considered Sections 137(2)/87 of the B.N.S., 2023 in the context of bail applications. Facts of the Case: The petitioner, Uday Sharma, requested bail after being accused of kidnapping related to P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025, asserting no involvement based on his clean antecedents.

Findings of Court:
The court acknowledged the lack of substantial evidence against the petitioner, primarily associating him due to his relationship with a main accused.

Issues: The main question framed by the court was the grant of bail considering the merits of the case.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reasoned that the petitioner should not be held based solely on familial connections to another accused, highlighting the importance of clear evidence in such charges.

Result: The petitioner was granted bail on providing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with conditions for cooperation and future actions concerning any concealment of antecedents.

Table of Content
1. accusation based on familial ties. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
2. bail granted with specific conditions. (Para 5 , 6)

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Parmanand Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Parmanand Prasad, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

28.05.2025, in connection with Piplawan P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 04.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 137(2)/87 of the B.N.S. ,2023.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons have kidnapped the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. and he has been made accused merely on the ground that he is father of co-accused Saurabh Kumar and the main allegation of kidnappning is against co-accused Saurabh Kumar. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since

28.05.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and he has been made accused merely on the ground that he is father of main accused Saurabh Kumar, let the petitioner, above named, be released 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 learned A.C.J.M. IV, Danapur, Patna in connection with Piplawan P.S. Case No. 59 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) 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.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) 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 antecedents, 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)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top