Patna High Court
Dilkhush KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilkhush Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and the Arms Act, alleging that he was implicated in the manufacturing of illegal weapons based solely on the confessional statements of co‑accused arrested during a raid. The petitioner argued that no weapon was recovered from his possession, the co‑accused statements lack evidentiary value, and his prior case does not relate to the Arms Act. The State opposed the bail, highlighting that arms and ammunition were seized from the raid site, the investigation is at an early stage, and granting bail could enable the petitioner to abscond. After considering the submissions, the Court declined to extend anticipatory bail, finding the risk of absconding and the seriousness of the allegations outweigh the petitioner's arguments. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the case
- Whether confessional statements of co‑accused have evidentiary value for bail considerations
- Whether the petitioner’s prior case, not under the Arms Act, influences the bail decision
- Whether the risk of the petitioner absconding justifies denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-A), 25(1)(a), 25(1-AA), 25(1-B)(a), 25(1-B)(c), 26(1), 26(2), 35
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 111(1), 111(2)(b), 111(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- confessional statements
- bail jurisprudence
- risk of absconding
- illegal weapon manufacturing
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78043 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2025 Thana- MUNGER MUFFASIL District- Munger
======================================================
Dilkhush Kumar S/O Bijo Yadav @ Bijay Kumar Yadav R/O Village- Taufir
(Tauhfir), (Toufir), P.S- Muffasil, Distt.- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ahmad Ali
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in Munger Muffasil P. S. Case No.125 of 2025 registered
for the offences punishable under Sections 111(1),111(2)
(b),111(4),3(5) of the B.N.S and Sections 25(1)(a),25(1-
A),25(1-AA),25(1-B)(a),25(1-B)(c),26(1),26(2),35 of the Arms
Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant
alleges that on secret information that accused are
manufacturing illegal weapon, the place of occurrence was
raided and three accused were arrested who disclosed their
name as Md. Naushad, Md. Sajmul and Md. Naushad and also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78043 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
2/3
disclosed the name of petitioner and four others who fled from
place of occurrence. The apprehended accused also disclosed
that Md. Jasim and Md. Shamshad while fleeing left their
mobile and on search, illegal weapon and parts were recovered
as detailed in the FIR.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner was not arrested from the spot as such nothing was
recovered from his conscious possession and he came to be
implicated in the instant case based on confessional statement of
apprehended accused in police custody, which does not have
any evidentiary value. It is further submitted that petitioner has
antecedent of one case, but then, the same is not under the Arms
Act.
5. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the anticipatory
bail application and submits that informant alleges that on
receiving secret information that arms are being manufactured,
the place of occurrence was raided from where some accused
fled and three were apprehended who disclosed their name of
the petitioner along with others and from the place of
occurrence arms and ammunitions were recovered apart from
other things as detailed in the FIR. It is also submitted that
investigation is in its nascent stage and if privilege of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78043 of 2025(2) dt.05-01-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…