Patna High Court
Savita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted bail to Savita Devi but denied bail to Ramesh Kumar Jha and Abhishek Kumar.
Summary
The petitioners Ramesh Kumar Jha, Abhishek Kumar and Savita Devi were arrested in connection with a bank robbery (PS Case No. 113 of 2025) involving armed dacoity, theft of cash and jewellery worth crores, punishable under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution relied on confessional statements of co‑accused and recovered documents and gold from the house of Savita Devi's husband, but no direct witness identified the petitioners. Each petitioner sought bail, claiming lack of criminal antecedent (Savita) or that no material was recovered from their possession (Ramesh and Abhishek). The State opposed bail for all, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and the role attributed to the petitioners in planning and providing confidential information. The Court granted bail to Savita Devi on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, but rejected bail for Ramesh Kumar Jha and Abhishek Kumar, allowing them to re‑apply after the prosecution’s evidence is presented.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of granting bail to the accused in a serious armed robbery and dacoity case.
- Whether the confessional statements of co‑accused sufficiently link the petitioners to the offence.
- The relevance of recovered property from the petitioner’s husband’s house to the petitioners’ culpability.
- Whether the petitioners have any criminal antecedents that justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- bank robbery
- armed dacoity
- confessional statement
- Arms Act
- Section 310(2) B.N.S.
- criminal antecedent
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69545 of 2025
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, R/O
Vill- Jagdishpur Adharpur, P.S.- Karpurigram, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 69807 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek Gupta @ Rajan, S/o Uma Shankar Prasad,
Resident of Village - Dudhpura, Ward no.- 6, P.S - Muffasil, District -
Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 70251 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- SAMASTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Savita Devi, W/O Akhilesh Ray @ Golai Ray @ Golu Ray, R/O Village- Tara
Dhamaun, Ward No. 03, P.S.- Patori @ Patory, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 69545 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 69807 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anish Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 70251 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
======================================================
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
2/9
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
CAV ORDER
6 22-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection
with Samastipur Town P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025 registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 310(2) of B.N.S. and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that while
the informant was at his bank, 2 persons came inside the bank,
spoke to the Deputy Branch Manager one of them came to his
cabin and got behind his back, took his pistol out, pointed the
same at him and enquired about the cash. Thereafter, 4-5 other
accused persons entered the Branch, and at the time 3-4
customers were present at the Bank, they overpowered all the
persons present at the Bank, took their mobile phones, and made
them hostage. In the meantime, the cashier and the Bank Peon
entered the Bank from the outside. They took the key on
gunpoint from the cashier the staff were closed in a room and
one of the accused was keeping watch on the said room as they
were assaulted. It is further alleged that on gunpoint the accused
persons got the locker opened, and took away the articles and
cash present therein. The cashier's bag was also taken away by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
3/9
the accused, containing cheque books, aadhar card etc. When
the articles (cash, and gold) were accounted for, it was found
that cash of Rupees 15 lacs and odd and jewellery of
approximately 7.5 crores were looted by the miscreants.
Regarding the petitioner Bittu, it has been submitted that during
the entire investigation, no witness has named this petitioner,
and the police too has collected 2 backup drives of the CCTV
cameras installed in the storeroom, which were being centrally
controlled from Noida by ANG India Ltd. In the said CCTV
footage, 2 bikers were observed going on a pulsar bike.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner Savita Devi in Cr.
Misc. No. 70251 of 2025 has submitted that F.I.R. was lodged
against unknown miscreants. It has further been submitted that
during course of investigation, the confessional statement of
Randhir Kumar @ Babloo was recorded and after that confessional
statement, the house of the petitioner’s husband was raided several
times which is apparent from paras 47, 75, 92, 102 , 168 and 203
of the case diary and nothing was recovered from the house of the
petitioner’s husband. After arrest of Randhir Kumar @ Babloo,
other persons were arrested on the basis of confessional statement
of Randhir Kumar @ Babloo and they have disclosed the name of
the husband of the petitioner. On 07.07.2025, the husband of the
petitioner was arrested and his confessional statement was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
4/9
recorded wherein he has stated that he has given looted gold to
his mother-in-law, sister-in-law and his wife. On his
identification, the alleged gold was recovered from the house of
the petitioner’s husband and on that basis, petitioner was
arrested. Learned counsel has further submitted that nothing has
been recovered from the possession of this petitioner rather the
recovery has been made from the house of the petitioner’s
husband who is also an accused in this case and allegation
against this petitioner if at all is that she has received the stolen
property. There is no allegation against this petitioner that
actually she was involved in the occurrence. Learned counsel
has also submitted that role, if any, in the said occurrence that
may be of her husband and petitioner is having no criminal
antecedent. She is languishing in judicial custody since
08.07.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner, namely, Savita Devi.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner Abhishek
Kumar in Cr. Misc. No. 69807 of 2025 has submitted that
F.I.R. was lodged against unknown miscreants. It has further been
submitted that petitioner was the valuer of Bank of Maharashtra,
Samastipur and on the call of Bank Manager, he used to visit the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
5/9
Bank and furnished the report of gold so produced by the
authority as per test done by equipment in their presence. It has
further been submitted that with the conspiracy of the police, the
authority of the Bank called the petitioner at Bank on
26.03.2025 and when the petitioner reached there, the STF
(Special Task Force) and local police got him catch and taking
his several signatures on various plain papers. Learned counsel
for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner is having
no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody
since 25.06.2025.
7. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner, namely, Abhishek Kumar and has
submitted that there is allegation that the petitioner has
conversation with the accused persons and on his input, the
offence was committed. The name of this petitioner has surfaced
during course of investigation on the basis of confessional
statement of co-accused Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Munsi and
Ramesh Kumar Jha. In their confessional statement, it has come
that the petitioner has passed on confidential details regarding
the gold kept in the bank locker. Co-accused Deepak Kumar @
Deepak Munsi and Ramesh Kumar Jha have disclosed the role
of the accused in the alleged occurrence in their confessional/
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
6/9
disclosure statements and petitioner has also given his
confessional statement. From perusal of the case diary, it is clear
that Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Munsi and Ramesh Kumar Jha
have stated 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 jewelleries worth crores have
been looted from the Bank. In such crimes, without the
confidential information of input, no offence is committed. First
requisite of such offence is that the accused persons collect the
input from available resources. 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 statement is of providing input which is
very serious in nature and in this offence, the jewelleries of the
public is the subject matter of the offence.
8. As far as the petitioner, namely, Ramesh Kumar
Jha in Cr. Misc. No. 69545 of 2025 is concerned, it has been
submitted that F.I.R. was lodged against unknown miscreants.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
7/9
Petitioner is having criminal antecedent of two cases and he is
on bail on those cases. The name of this petitioner has surfaced
on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Deepak
Kumar @ Deepak Munsi. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that nothing has been recovered from the conscious
possession of this petitioner. Moreover, he is languishing in
judicial custody since 24.06.2025.
9. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of this petitioner, namely, Ramesh Kumar Jha
and has submitted that from perusal of para ‘222’ of the case
diary, it is clear that from the house of this petitioner, various
documents of Bank 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 lakhs
from Bank of Baroda, Kashipur, Samastipur after mortgaging
150 grams of gold. During audit, it has come that the 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 by mortgaging
sub-standard gold. He came in contact with Abhishek who is the
valuer and with his connivance, he has mortgage 200 grams of
sub-standard gold in Bank of Maharashtra and has taken loan of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
8/9
Rs. 23 lakhs and he has further stated that Abhishek disclosed
him every details of the locker. The petitioner was scared of any
audit. On this, Abhishek Kumar introduced him with one Sunil
and Sunil gave a report favoring the petitioner and gave all the
details of the gold. The petitioner was scared of audit as he has
mortgaged sub-standard gold. He plan to commit dacoity and
disclosed his intentions to Deepak Munsi. He has further
stated that he along with Deepak Munsi according to his plan
the Bank was looted. After that, he went to various places. From
his confessional statement, it is clear that this much is clear that
his role was there in planning the occurrence. Needless to say
that in such offences, inputs at planning are the key ingredients.
Co-accused persons have also stated that the petitioner has made
the plan.
10. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner, namely, Savita Devi on bail.
The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with
Samastipur Town P.S. Case No.113 of 2025.
11. So far as Petitioners, namely, Ramesh Kumar Jha
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69545 of 2025(6) dt.22-01-2026
9/9
and Abhishek Kumar are concerned and considering the nature
of allegation against them, this court is not inclined to enlarge
these petitioners on bail at this stage and, as such, their prayer
for bail stands rejected.
12. However, both the petitioners, namely, namely,
Ramesh Kumar Jha and Abhishek Kumar 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.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE 09.01.2026.
Uploading Date 22.01.2026
Transmission Date 22.01.2026
Checking your session…