Siddheshwar Rai vs. The State Of Bihar
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Siddheshwar Rai, sought bail in connection with Buddha Colony P.S. Case No. 407 of 2022, registered for offences under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with other miscreants, committed dacoity in an LCT Ghat (Casting Yard) Campus. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating no recovery was made from his possession or residence. He argued that a mobile phone allegedly recovered from him was purchased by him on 22.12.2022, evidenced by a GST bill with an IMEI number matching that on the seizure list. He further submitted that he had been in custody since 15.06.2025, had no criminal antecedents, and a charge-sheet had been filed. The State opposed the bail application.
Held
The Court granted bail to the petitioner. The primary reasoning for granting bail revolved around the petitioner's submission that the mobile phone allegedly recovered from his possession, which formed a basis for his implication, was in fact purchased by him. This was supported by a GST bill indicating the purchase date and IMEI number, which matched the IMEI number mentioned in the seizure list. The Court considered this as a significant factor suggesting the alleged looted mobile was not recovered from the petitioner. Additionally, the Court took into account the petitioner's submission that he had no criminal antecedents and had been in custody since 15.06.2025, with a charge-sheet already filed. The Court found merit in the petitioner's arguments, leading to the decision to release him on bail, subject to furnishing bail bonds and sureties, and adhering to specific conditions to ensure his cooperation in the trial and prevent misuse of bail.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in connection with Buddha Colony P.S. Case No. 407 of 2022, considering the allegations of dacoity under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code? The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated and that the primary piece of evidence against him, a recovered mobile phone, was actually purchased by him, as evidenced by a GST bill. He emphasized his lack of criminal antecedents and the fact that he had been in custody for a significant period, with a charge-sheet already filed. The petitioner relied on the GST bill and the matching IMEI number to demonstrate his innocence regarding the alleged looted mobile phone. The State, represented by the learned A.P.P., opposed the prayer for bail without detailing specific arguments or legal provisions relied upon.
Sections Cited
Section 395
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER 4 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Buddha Colony P.S. Case No. 407 of 2022 dated 27.08.2022, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with 25-30 miscreants armed with weapons entered into LCT Ghat (Casting Yard) Campus and committed dacoity.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that nothing has been recovered either from the conscious possession or from the house of the petitioner. It is alleged that one looted mobile phone was 2/3 recovered from the possession of the petitioner but that mobile was purchased by the petitioner on 22.12.2022 with GST Bill in which the IMEI number is also mentioned and the same IMEI number is mentioned in the seizure list which means that the alleged looted mobile was purchased by the petitioner. Only on the basis of self confessional statement, the petitioner has been made accused in this case. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 15.06.2025, having no criminal antecedents and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Patna in Buddha Colony P.S. Case No. 407 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:-
Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
3/3
One of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father, mother, brother, sister and or his wife.
The bailor shall also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of misuse.
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.
Sankalp/- (Khatim Reza, J) U T
Reproduced from the public record of the Patna High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.