Patna High Court
Kiran JhaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and conditions, as the only link to the offence was ownership of the mobile number and no direct incriminating evidence was found.
Summary
The petitioner, Kiran Jha, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a murder case solely because she owned the mobile number used for communications related to the crime. The FIR, filed under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 24(1‑B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act, named five accused, but the petitioner was not expressly named, only linked through the mobile number. The trial court rejected her anticipatory bail application, relying on electronic evidence of calls between the deceased, co‑accused, and the petitioner’s number. The petitioner argued that the co‑accused, Mithun Giri, had already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate bench of the same High Court. Considering the lack of direct incriminating material against her and the precedent of bail to the co‑accused, the Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond of Rs.30,000 and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNS, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to a person implicated only by ownership of a mobile number and not named in the FIR.
- Whether the grant of anticipatory bail to a co‑accused influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 24(1-B)(a), 26, 27, 35
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 2(1)(d), 3(5), 482(2), 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- mobile number evidence
- murder
- arms act
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36457 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-246 Year-2024 Thana- BENIPATTI District- Madhubani
======================================================
Kiran Jha S/o Manoj Kumar Jha @ Manoj Jha Resident of Village -
Dhanauja(Lorika), P.S.- Benipatti, Dist. - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 04-06-2026 The Court proceeding is being conducted through
virtual mode.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
3. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Benipatti P.S. Case No. 246 of 2024, dated 22.10.2024,
lodged under Sections 103(1), 61(2) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”)
and Sections 24(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
4. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been
lodged against five named accused persons, out of whom three
names have been specifically disclosed, while two names have
surfaced on the basis of the holder of a mobile number. It has
been alleged that all the accused persons, including the mobile
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36457 of 2026(2) dt.04-06-2026
2/3
number holder along with some unknown miscreants, in
furtherance of a criminal conspiracy, committed the murder of
the informant’s father.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been implicated only on account of being the
owner of the mobile number in question. It is further submitted
that, as per the rejection order, the only material against the
petitioner is alleged repeated communication through the
petitioner’s mobile number with the deceased as well as co-
accused persons around the relevant time, and on the basis of
such electronic evidence, the learned Trial Court has rejected the
anticipatory bail application of the petitioner. It is further
submitted that one Mithun Giri, who allegedly used the
petitioner’s mobile phone for communication with other
persons, has been in contact with the petitioner’s son. It is also
submitted that the co-accused, namely Mithun Giri, has already
been granted anticipatory bail by a Coordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 02.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
76373 of 2025, which has been annexed as Annexure-P/2.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that although the petitioner is
not named in the FIR and is an aged lady of about 49 years, she
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36457 of 2026(2) dt.04-06-2026
3/3
has been implicated on the basis of the fact that she is the holder
of the mobile number in question.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
present case, particularly the fact that the co-accused, namely
Mithun Giri, has already been granted anticipatory bail vide
order dated 02.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 76373 of 2025,
let the above-named petitioner be released on anticipatory bail,
in the event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a
period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section
2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M
Benipatti at Madhubani, in connection with Benipatti P.S. Case
No. 246 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s
482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.