Patna High Court
Md. DilshanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Dilshan, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita concerning a robbery with a pistol. The FIR did not name him; his name surfaced only through the confessional statements of co‑accused Nitish Kumar and Sujeet Kumar, who alleged his involvement. No physical evidence or recovered articles linked the petitioner to the offence, and he maintains his innocence. The State opposed bail, relying on the co‑accused statements and the petitioner’s prior similar criminal antecedent. After considering the limited material and the antecedent, the Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only basis for implicating the petitioner is the confessional statements of co‑accused and a prior criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- confessional statement
- criminal antecedent
- Section 309
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail denial
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16639 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Md. Dilshan son of Md. Parwej @ Md. Paewej Alam Resident of Village-
Manjil Mubarak P.s.- Kalyanpur District -Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Om Prakash Om, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Kalyanpur P. S.
Case No. 58 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per F.I.R., on 21.02.2025 at about 7 PM, when
informant was going to Pusa, on the way, three unknown
miscreants, riding on a motorcycle, stopped informant and
snatched away his motorcycle and laptop on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner
is not named in the F.I.R.. Name of petitioner transpired in this
case during investigation, merely on the basis of confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16639 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/2
statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar and Sujeet Kumar. Save
and except confessional statement, there is no material on record
to show the complicity of this petitioner in the alleged
occurrence. No looted articles were recovered from possession
of this petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that
name of petitioner transpired in this case during investigation on
the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar
and Sujeet Kumar, who confessed regarding active role played
by all the accused persons, including this petitioner, in
commission of the offence. Petitioner has got one criminal
antecedent of similar nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, materials that have surfaced during investigation and
criminal antecedent of the petitioner, prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…