Patna High Court
GANESH KUMAR @ GANESH SAHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the confessional statement specifically implicated the petitioner and the investigation was still ongoing.
Summary
The petitioner, Ganesh Kumar, applied for anticipatory bail in a theft case involving a jewellery shop, where CCTV captured the incident and a confessional statement of co‑accused Sanjeet Mukhiya implicated him. The FIR alleges theft under Sections 303(2) and 334(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the prosecution claims the petitioner sold the stolen articles. The petitioner argued he was falsely implicated and has no criminal record. The State highlighted that the investigation identified multiple armed accused and that the confessional statement specifically assigned a role to the petitioner, indicating a serious allegation. Considering the nature of the allegation, the specific role assigned in the confessional statement, and the fact that investigation was ongoing, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petition for anticipatory bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita given the serious nature of the theft allegations and the confessional statement implicating him.
- Whether the ongoing investigation and specific role assigned to the petitioner in the confessional statement preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 334(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- theft
- confessional statement
- investigation
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87247 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2025 Thana- Patour District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Ganesh Kumar @ Ganesh Sah S/o Chano Sah R/o Ward No. 9, Chaklokman,
P.S.- Dalsingsarai, Dist.- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anurag Rishu, Advocate
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
4 19-03-2026 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 Patour Police Station Case No. 85 of 2025,
disclosing offences under Sections 303(2) and 334(2) of
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information
Report, is that theft was committed in the informant’s jewellery
shop on 30.08.2025, during which certain jewellery items,
details of which are mentioned in the FIR, were stolen and the
entire incident was captured in the CCTV camera.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on the basis of
confessional statement of co-accused Sanjeet Mukhiya. The
petitioner is having no criminal antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87247 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
5. Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned counsel for the
State, referring to the case diary, submits that during
investigation it has transpired that altogether 3–4 accused
persons arrived at the place of occurrence during the night
armed with khanti and other tools and started breaking the
shutter of the shop. The accused persons had their faces
covered, out of whom two entered the shop while the other two
remained outside and collected the stolen articles. It has further
been submitted in the confessional statement that a specific role
has been attributed to the petitioner, stating that after
committing the theft the stolen articles were sold to another
jeweller, and the police have recovered the same from co-
accused Sanjeet Mukhiya. It also appears from the confessional
statement that on the date of occurrence theft was committed in
two different shops with the involvement of a history-sheeter,
namely Baba @ Madan Mukhiya.
5. Regards being had to the submissions made on
behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature of
allegation and the fact that in the confessional statement the
specific role has been assigned to the petitioner, which may
form the basis for further investigation by the police and the
investigation of the case is still going on, I am not inclined to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87247 of 2025(4) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
grant the petitioner the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
Siwani/-
U T
Checking your session…