Patna High Court

Manjeet sharma @ Manjit sharmaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 6 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to regular bail as the prosecution failed to produce substantive evidence beyond the CDR and alleged confession.

Summary

Manjeet Sharma was arrested in connection with a case registered under sections 109, 3(5) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and section 27 of the Arms Act, based primarily on a call data record (CDR) linking him to a co‑accused, Dilip Sharma, and an alleged confessional statement. The petitioner contended that his name did not appear in the FIR, that there was no other incriminating material, and that he had no prior criminal record, having been in judicial custody since 18‑11‑2025. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the paucity of evidence beyond the CDR and the alleged confession, noted that a co‑accused had already been granted bail, and considered the petitioner’s clean antecedents. Consequently, the Court ordered the release of the petitioner on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the allegations under sections 109, 3(5) of the Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act and section 27 of the Arms Act.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bihar Negotiable Instruments Act — s. 109, 3(5)

Subjects

regular bail
criminal procedure
arms act
evidentiary insufficiency
call data record
confessional statement

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7631 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2025 Thana- ALINAGAR District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Manjeet sharma @ Manjit sharma Son of Indra Bhushan Sharma R/V -
                 Nankar Dasaut, P.S. - Alinagar, District – Darbhanga.        . ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar                          ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ajay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   06-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 109, 3 (5)

                   of the BNS as well as Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that some unknown

                   miscreants had fired upon the informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

                   connection with the present case. It is further submitted that

                   name of this petitioner did not figure in the FIR and has

                   surfaced in connection with the present case during the course

                   of investigation on the basis of CDR of one Manjit Sharma and

                   the petitioner. From the CDR, it was alleged that the petitioner

                   was in telephonic conversation with one Dilip Sharma. It is
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7631 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      further submitted that the allegation is that the petitioner had

                      planned to commit murder and has also made his confessional

                      statement. However, save and except the CDR and the alleged

                      confessional statement, there is no other incriminating material

                      against the petitioner. It is further submitted that co-accused,

                      namely, Dilip Sharma @ Deelip Sharma, who is having similar

                      nature of allegation, has already been extended the privilege of

                      bail vide order dated 17.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 67411

                      of 2025.          Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial

                      custody since 18.11.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

                                   5.      Learned APP appearing for the state has

                      vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

                                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                      of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

                      bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on

                      bail in connection with Alinagar P.S. Case No. 76 of 2025 on

                      furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

                      sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

                      SDJM, Benipur, Darbhanga.


                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…