Patna High Court
Ranjan Kumar ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that there is no substantive material against the petitioner and the confessional statement is inadmissible, thereby granting bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjan Kumar Manjhi, was charged under sections 109 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly being involved in a shooting incident where two masked assailants on a motorcycle fired at an informant. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on a police‑recorded confessional statement in which the petitioner admitted to conducting reconnaissance, while the actual firing was attributed to co‑accused Chhotu @ Manir and Israfil. The petitioner contended that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants and that the confessional statement is inadmissible as substantive evidence. The informant opposed bail, citing recovery of the motorcycle from the petitioner and the seriousness of the injury. The court found no substantive material linking the petitioner to the firing, held the confessional statement inadmissible, and consequently ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether a police‑recorded confessional statement is admissible as substantive evidence for the purpose of denying bail.
- Whether the material on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail under the charges of sections 109, 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and section 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether possession of the motorcycle used in the offence implicates the petitioner for bail denial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 109, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- confessional statement
- admissibility
- Arms Act
- Narcotic law
- evidentiary insufficiency
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14659 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2025 Thana- UCHKAGAON District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Ranjan Kumar Manjhi S/o Late Rajendra Manjhi R/o Village - Birvat Bazar,
P.s - Uchkagaon, District - Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arbind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Devashish Giri, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 18-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Informant
and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under sections 109, 3 (5)
of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that while
the informant was sleeping at the door of his house, he saw two
persons who had covered their faces and were on a Splendor
motorcycle, and they fired at the informant on his back.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the
FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. During the course
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14659 of 2026(3) dt.18-04-2026
2/3
of investigation, on the basis of a secret informant, the petitioner
was apprehended and his confessional statement was recorded,
wherein he has stated that he had conducted reconnaissance
(reiki), whereas the co-accused persons, namely Chhotu @
Manir and Israfil, had fired at the informant. It is further
submitted that a confessional statement made before the police
is not admissible in evidence and cannot be treated as
substantive material.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
informant has vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that
the motorcycle used in the commission of the offence has been
recovered from the possession of the petitioner, and the injury
report indicates that the firearm injury was inflicted on a vital
part of the informant.
6. Upon consideration of the materials on record, it
appears that, save and except the confessional statement, there is
no substantive material against the petitioner, and even in the
said confessional statement, the allegation of firing is not
attributed to him. The petitioner is in custody since 01.10.2025.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14659 of 2026(3) dt.18-04-2026
3/3
bail in connection with Uchkagaon P.S. Case No. 366 of 2025
on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1, Gopalganj.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-
U T
Checking your session…