Patna High Court - Orders
Harendra Kumar Singh @ Pankaj Singh vs The State Of Bihar Through Ats Bihar ... on 9 February, 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1941 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2015 Thana- A.T.S District- Patna
======================================================
Harendra Kumar Singh @ Pankaj Singh S/o Late Ramkrit Singh Resident of
Village- Dhibra, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State of Bihar through ATS Bihar Patna BIHAR
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anand Mohan Prasad Mehta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-20261-Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
2-This appeal under Sections 415 (2) and 430(1) of B.N.S.S. has been preferred by the appellant namely, Harendra Kumar Singh @ Pankaj Singh against the judgment of conviction dated 07.04.2025 and order of sentence dated 11.04.2025 passed by learned Special Judge, ATS, Bihar, Patna in ATS Special Case No. 03 of 2024 arising out of ATS Bihar Patna Police Station Case No. 03 of 2015, Under Sections 498(B), 489(C), read with Section 34 of the IPC, District Patna, convicting and sentencing the appellant as under:-
(a) Four years' simple imprisonment and fine of Rs.
2,000/- for the offence under Section 489(B)/34 of the Indian Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1941 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026 2/5 Penal Code.
(b) Three years' simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. and in default of payment of fine, one month' additional simple imprisonment.
All the sentences are ordered to run concurrently.
3-The appellant has prayed for suspension of his sentence and release on bail during the pendency of this Criminal Appeal before this Court.
4- As per the prosecution case in brief, it is alleged inter alia that upon receiving confidential information about smuggling and delivery of FICN, a team was constituted for follow up action and it is the case of the prosecution that five persons were apprehended. They were subjected to personal search in presence of two independent persons namely Jabbar and Kuldeep Prasad Yadav, which led to the recovery of FICN of the face value of Rs. 50,000/-from the possession of Abdul Rahman, recovery of FICN of the face value of Rs. 50,000/- from the possession of Kamlesh, recovery of FICN of the face value of Rs. 25,000/-from the possession of Shailesh, recovery of FICN of the face value of Rs. 50,000/-from the possession of Manish Kumar Singh and recovery of FICN of the face value of Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1941 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026 3/5 Rs. 25,000/-from the possession of Harendra Kumar Singh. As such total FICN of the face value of Rs. 2 lakhs were recovered from the possession of the accused persons along with their mobiles, I-Cards and ATM, etc. 5-It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence of the appellant is not sustainable in the eyes of the law. The maximum sentence awarded to the appellant is up to four years against which appellant has served total two years five months and seven days in jail. The appellant does not have any criminal history to his credit. It is also submitted that on account of huge pendency of cases before this Court, there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard before completing the entire sentence. Lastly, it is submitted that in case appellant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate in early hearing of this appeal.
6-Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for bail by contending that prosecution has proved it's case beyond reasonable doubt, hence at this stage presumption of innocence is not available to the appellant but he could not dispute the incarceration period of the appellant, as noted above. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1941 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026 4/5 7-Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the gravity of the offence as well as looking to the detention period of the appellant in jail as mentioned above, I find that the appellant has made out a case for suspension of sentence and grant of bail during pendency of this Criminal Appeal in the light of judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Saudan Singh vs. State of U.P., 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3259, wherein, it has been observed by the Apex Court that there may be even convicts in custody in cases other than life sentence cases and in those cases again the broad parameter of 50 percent of the actual sentence undergone can be the basis for grant of bail and in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I, (2022) 10 SCC 51 wherein, it has been observed that when a person has undergone detention for a period extending to one-half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offence, he shall be released by the court on his personal bond with or without sureties.
8-The Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Atul @ Ashutosh versus State of Madhya Pradesh also while allowing Criminal Appeal No. 579 of 2024 vide order dated 02.02.2024 has made following observations:-
"Before parting with order, we must note here that Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1941 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026 5/5 notwithstanding several decisions of this Court holding that when there is a fixed term sentence and especially when the appeal is not likely to be heard before completing entire period of sentence, normally suspension of sentence and bail should be granted. We find that in several deserving cases, bail is being denied. Such cases should never be required to be brought before this Court".
9-In view of the above without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, let the appellant- Harendra Kumar Singh @ Pankaj Singh be enlarged on bail during pendency of this appeal in above Case on his furnishing bail bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.
10-On acceptance of the bail bonds, the concerned Court below shall furnish the photocopy thereof to this Court for being kept on record of this Criminal Appeal.
11-Let this Criminal Appeal be listed in due course for hearing.
(Sanjay Kumar Singh , J) Raj Ranjan/-
U