Patna High Court
Ranjit Mahto @ ShuklaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjit Mahto, was named in a 2018 case for alleged offences under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1‑B)a, 26(i)(ii) and 35 of the Arms Act, based on a secret tip about a planned dacoity and a subsequent raid in which three accused were seized. The petitioner fled the scene and was implicated primarily through the confessional statement of a co‑accused. He pleaded innocence and applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the charge rested solely on the co‑accused’s confession. The State opposed the bail, highlighting the petitioner’s twenty prior criminal antecedents. The Court, after considering the seriousness of the alleged offences and the petitioner’s criminal history, refused the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner given the nature of the alleged offences and his criminal antecedents
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused alone suffices to justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26(i)(ii), 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 399, 402
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dacoity
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedents
- confessional statement
- bail refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38178 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-413 Year-2018 Thana- BARAUNI District- Begusarai
======================================================
Ranjit Mahto @ Shukla S/o Late Shiv Nandan Mahto Resident of Village-
Pokharia, Ward No. 36, P.S.- Begusarai Town, District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, Mr. Amit Prakash, Advocates
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 25-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Barauni Refinery P.
S. Case No. 413 of 2018 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 399, 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections
25(1-B)a, 26(i)(ii), 35 of Arms Act
3. As per F.I.R., on a secret information that five
miscreants are planning to commit dacoity, a raid was conducted
and three miscreants were apprehended on the spot. Petitioner is
alleged to have fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner
has been made accused in this case merely on the basis of
confessional statement of co-accused.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38178 of 2026(2) dt.25-06-2026
2/2
the bail application and submitted that petitioner has got twenty
criminal antecedents.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and criminal
antecedents, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.