Patna High Court
ABHISHEK KUMAR @ ABHISHEK GUPTA @ RAJAN @ RANJANversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted to the petitioners at this stage of the proceedings.
Summary
The High Court considered applications for regular bail filed by Ramesh Kumar Jha and Abhishek Kumar, who were charged under Section 310(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act in connection with a bank locker robbery. The prosecution’s case relied on confessional statements of co‑accused persons and the testimony of an informant who identified both petitioners as having supplied confidential information about gold stored in the locker. The petitioners contended that they were innocent and had been in judicial custody since June 2025. The Court examined the depositions of witnesses, the informant’s statements, and the alleged prior complaints against the petitioners, finding the evidence indicative of their involvement. Considering the seriousness of the offence and the material evidence, the Court refused to grant bail, directing that the petitioners may renew their application after six months if the trial remains pending and ordering the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail despite the existence of confessional statements and informant testimony linking them to the offence.
- Whether the nature of the offences under Section 310(2) BNS and Section 27 Arms Act warrants denial of bail at the pre‑trial stage.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 310(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- confessional statement
- informant testimony
- Arms Act
- bank robbery
- pre‑trial detention
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25205 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ramesh Kumar Jha son of Raj Kumar Jha @ Late Ram Kumar Jha Resident
of Village- Jagdishpur Adharpur PS -Karpurigram District -Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 25394 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek Gupta @ Rajan @ Ranjan S/O Uma Shankar
Prasad R/O Vill - Dudhpura, Ward No. 6, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 25205 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 25394 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
CAV ORDER
3 05-05-2026 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in
connection with Samastipur Town P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025
instituted for the offence under Section 310(2) of BNS and
Section 27 of the Arms Act which was earlier rejected vide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25205 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
2/6
order dated 22.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 69545/ 2025 &
69807/25 with an observation that the petitioners may renew
their prayer for bail after the evidence of the informant and other
witnesses, if they do not support the case of the prosecution.
3. Learned counsels for the petitioners have filed the
depositions of the witnesses.
4. Learned counsels for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Moreover, they are languishing in judicial custody since
24.06.2025 and 25.06.2025 respectively.
5. The main allegation against the petitioner, namely,
Abhishek is that Abhishek was the valuer of the bank and he had
a conversation with the accused persons and on his input, this
offense was committed. The name of this petitioner has surfaced
during the course of investigation on the basis of confessional
statement of the co-accused Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Munshi
and petitioner Ramesh Kumar Jha. In their confessional
statement, it has come that the petitioner Abhishek has passed
the confidential details regarding the gold kept in the bank
locker. Co-accused Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Munshi and
petitioner Ramesh Jha have disclosed the role of the co-accused
in the alleged occurrence in their confessional disclosure and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25205 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
3/6
this petitioner has also given his confessional statement. From
perusal of the case diary, it is clear that the petitioner is the
valuer of the Bank of Maharashtra and he had an opportunity to
visit the Bank of Maharashtra, Kashipur Samastipur, where the
occurrence has taken place and as a valuer, he was also having
the information regarding the gold and jewellery kept in locker
and this input was given by him to the co-accused persons. The
kind of offence which has been committed where jewellery
worth crores have been looted from the bank. In such crimes
without the confidential information, no offence is committed.
First requisite of such offence is that the accused persons collect
the input from available resources. Though the petitioner shows
himself as innocent as he has no active role in the occurrence of
the crime but the role which has been disclosed by the co-
accused persons in their confessional statements is of providing
input which is serious in nature.
6. As far as petitioner, namely, Ramesh Jha is
concerned, he is having criminal antecedent of two cases and he
is on bail in those cases and the name of this petitioner has
surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused
Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Munshi. It is clear from the diary that
from the house of this petitioner, various documents of banks
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25205 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
4/6
were recovered. This petitioner has also given his confessional
statement and in his confessional statement he has stated that he
has taken gold loan of Rs. 3 lakh from Bank of Baroda,
Kashipur, Samastipur after mortgaging 150 gram of gold.
During audit, it has come that purity of the gold was below
standard. After that, a case was filed against him by the bank.
After that he came to know that in connivance with the valuer,
loan can be obtained while mortgaging substandard gold. He
came in contact with petitioner Abhishek who is the valuer of
the bank and with his connivance, he has mortgaged 200 grams
of substandard gold in Bank of Maharashtra and has taken loan
of Rs. 23 lakhs and has further stated that Abhishek disclosed
him every details of the locker. Petitioner Ramesh Kumar Jha
was scared of any audit. Abhishek Kumar introduced him with
one Sunil and Sunil gave a report favouring the petitioner
Ramesh and gave all the details of the gold. The petitioner was
scared of audit as he has mortgaged substandard gold. He
planned to commit dacoity and disclosed his intention to
Deepak Munsi and in this organized manner, the offence was
committed. These are the brief allegations/facts of this case.
7. Now coming to the deposition of the informant. In
this case, informant has been examined as P.W.-2. In
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25205 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
5/6
examination in chief, the informant has identified both the
petitioners and in cross-examination on behalf of petitioner
Abhishek Kumar, it has come that certain complaints were
received against him who was the valuer of the bank. This goes
to show that the role of Abhishek Kumar was dubious even prior
to the occurrence. As far as the cross-examination on behalf of
petitioner Ramesh Jha is concerned, the informant has stated
that this petitioner has taken gold loan from the bank and has
not repaid the loan. His loan account is still running. He is
having two loan accounts in the bank and that he used to come
to bank alone. This statement of the informant goes to show that
the conduct of the petitioners which has emerged in the
evidence of the informant is of dubious nature. There were
complaints against Petitioner Abhishek. Petitioner Ramesh Jha
who was having loan accounts, was a regular visitor of the bank
and the role which has been attributed against them during
investigation is that they have given the input regarding the gold
which was kept in the locker of the bank which is the subject
matter of the offence.
8. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25205 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
6/6
case as well as the nature of offence, I am not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioners at this stage. As such, their prayer for bail
stands rejected.
10. Petitioners may be at liberty to renew their prayer
for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.
11. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial
and conclude the same within the stipulated period of time.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 01.05.2026
Uploading Date 05.05.2026
Transmission Date 05.05.2026
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.