Patna High Court
Mantu Kumar @ SanjayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted in view of the gravity of the dacoity and arms offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Mantu Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 310(4) & 310(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 and Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, alleging involvement in a planned dacoity and arms offences. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and a co‑accused were caught planning a dacoity in Patna, including looting a house and a jewellery shop. The petitioner claimed innocence, stating he was falsely implicated, and highlighted his three prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the gravity of the dacoity charge and the seriousness of the arms provisions. The Court, after considering the seriousness of the offences, declined to grant bail, dismissing the application and noting that its observations were prima facie and not a determination on the merits of the trial.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting regular bail to an accused in a dacoity case under Sections 310(4) & 310(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 and the Arms Act?
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 310(4), 310(5)
Subjects
- bail
- dacoity
- Arms Act
- serious offence
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 40684 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1106 Year-2025 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna
======================================================
Mantu Kumar @ Sanjay son of Late Vijay Sharma Resident of village-
Gamhari, P.S.- Uphara, District- Aurangabad At Present Residing at Rajeev
nagar Road No. 09, Near Mamta Backside of ITI, Ps- Rajeev Nagar, Dist-
Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Bharti, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Upendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 1106 of 2025 registered for the
offence under Sections 310(4) & 310(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 read
with Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26 & 35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and
another co-accused were caught planning to commit dacoity in
the town of Patna. They had planned the loot and reiki of the
house of Aarti Devi was done by a gang member. They also had
planned to loot one Alankar Jewellers in R.M.S. Colony.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is quite innocent and has not committed any offence
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 40684 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/2
and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is in
custody since 29.11.2025 having three criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail and submits that it is a case of
dacoity for which petitioner may not be granted bail.
6. Considering the gravity of offence, I am not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is
prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.