Patna High Court
Manjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court held that the prima facie existence of "continuing unlawful activity" was doubtful and therefore granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Manjeet Kumar was named in an FIR for offences under Sections 111(3) and 313 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 25(1‑ba), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act after co‑accused were found with firearms and identified him as a participant. The petitioner argued that he was hospitalized for a fractured leg at the time of the recovery, that the alleged activity did not constitute "continuing unlawful activity" under Explanation‑2 of Section 111(1), and that no direct incriminating material linked him to the crime. The State opposed bail, contending that the disclosure of his name by co‑accused was sufficient suspicion. The court examined whether the essential ingredient of "continuing unlawful activity" was established and found it doubtful, noting the lack of substantive evidence against the petitioner. Consequently, the court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner can be said to be involved in "continuing unlawful activity" as required under Explanation‑2 of Section 111(1) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act.
- Whether the mere disclosure of the petitioner’s name by co‑accused suffices to justify denial of bail.
- Whether bail can be granted under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act in the present circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 111(1), 111(3), 313, 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- continuing unlawful activity
- Section 111
- Arms Act
- Criminal Procedure Code
- suspicion
- co‑accused disclosure
- medical condition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27392 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-736 Year-2025 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali
======================================================
Manjeet Kumar S/o Prabhu Sah @ Prabhu Kumar Sah R/o vill -
Cheharakhalan, P.S.- Kathara Goraul, Distt.- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nachiketa Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Goraul (Kathara) P.S.
Case No. 736 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 111(3) and 313 of the BNS and Sections 25(1-
b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per FIR, apprehended co-accused persons found
in possession of firearms and live cartridges, where one country-
made pistol and two live cartridges was recovered from one of
the co-accused and from another co-accused only two live
cartridges was recovered and upon arrest they disclosed names of
six persons, who fled from there and petitioner was also one of
them.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27392 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
behalf of the petitioner that on the date of recovery, petitioner
was admitted in Nalanda Medical College and Hospital and was
under treatment for his fractured leg. It is also submitted that
petitioner found involved in four more criminal cases, where he is
on bail, but none of the offence is related with organized crime
and, therefore, the present activity cannot be said as “continuing
unlawful activity” in terms of Explanation-2 Section 111(1) of the
BNS. While concluding argument, it is submitted that admittedly
except suspicion arising out of disclosure of apprehended co-
accused nothing incriminating appears against this petitioner and
moreover on all material aspects the investigation of this case is
already concluded and by sending this petitioner behind the bar
no purpose of justice would be served.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of fact as prima-facie “continuing unlawful activity”
appears doubtful, being essential ingredient to constitute offence
under Section 111 of the BNS, coupled with the fact as except
suspicion arising out of disclosure of apprehended co-accused
nothing incriminating appears against this petitioner, accordingly
petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the court below within a period of four weeks, is directed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27392 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each
to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM-1, Vaishali at
Hajipur/concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection
with Goraul (Kathara) P.S. Case No. 736 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/
Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…