Patna High Court

Niranjan Kumar @ Niranjan Mahto @ KataruyaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 1 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANIL KUMAR SINHA

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied as the confessional statement may necessitate the petitioner’s presence for further investigation and his criminal antecedent was a relevant factor.

Summary

The petitioner, Niranjan Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a case concerning alleged purchase of a stolen motorcycle, offences alleged under Sections 317(4) and 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The prosecution’s case rests on the confessional statement of a co‑accused who claimed he bought the bike from the petitioner. The petitioner argued that no other evidence links him to the crime and that the confession is unreliable. The State highlighted the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent under the Arms Act and contended that the confession warrants further investigation. The court held that the confession could lead to additional inquiry and, given the petitioner’s antecedent, bail could not be granted. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the sole evidence is a co‑accused’s confessional statement.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent under the Arms Act precludes anticipatory bail.
Whether offences under Sections 317(4) and 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 317(4), 317(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
confessional statement
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
motorcycle theft
criminal antecedent
Arms Act

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78832 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Niranjan Kumar @ Niranjan Mahto @ Kataruya S/o Jay Kishor Mahto R/o
                 Village- Laldasi, P.S.- Majorganj, District- Sitamarhi

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s

                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Nawal Kishore Pd., A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   01-04-2026                  Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail,

                   arises out of Majorganj Police Station Case No. 121 of 2025,

                   disclosing offences under Sections 317(4) and 317(5) of

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

                                3. As per the prosecution case lodged by the A.S.I.,

                   Majorganj Police Station, that on the basis of secret

                   information that Ram Eshwar Mahto was having a stolen

                   motorcycle and was trying to sell it, proceeded towards the

                   place of occurrence and arrested him with Hero Splendor Plus

                   motorcycle bearing registration no. BRO6DD5696, which
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78832 of 2025(4) dt.01-04-2026
                                            2/3




          was found to be stolen, for which the owner of the motorcycle

          had lodged another case bearing Majorganj P.S. Case No. 121

          of 2025. On interrogation, the arrested accused, Ram Eshwar

          Mahto, disclosed the name of the petitioner and the co-

          accused that the motorcycle in question was purchased from

          them on payment of Rs. 5,000/-.

                       4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that

          the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case only on

          the basis of confessional statement of arrested co-accused and

          he has not committed any offence in the manner alleged. No

          further evidence has been collected by the police showing any

          connection of the petitioner with the present offence.

                       5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public

          Prosecutor for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for

          bail and submits that in the FIR itself, the arrested person has

          said that he purchased the motorcycle from the petitioner and

          the petitioner is having criminal antecedent under the Arms

          Act also.

                        6. Regards being had to the submissions made by

          the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the

          confessional statement of the arrested co-accused may form

          the basis of further investigation against the petitioner, for
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78832 of 2025(4) dt.01-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     which his presence may be necessary, and the petitioner is

                     also having criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant the

                     petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.

                                  7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.



                                              (Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
Siwani/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…