Patna High Court
Dhananjay Kumar @ PatalpaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail as the prosecution has not produced any cogent material to justify his arrest.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhananjay Kumar, was implicated in Barh Police Station Case No. 351 of 2025 under Section 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for allegedly snatching a money bag. He contended that he was not present at the scene, that the identification was based on an unverified disclosure, and that no incriminating material or independent witness linked him to the offence, alleging political enmity. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. The High Court examined the record and found that the prosecution’s case rested merely on suspicion without any direct or circumstantial evidence, and the petitioner had a clean antecedent. Consequently, the Court directed the District Court to grant anticipatory bail upon arrest or surrender, subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the prosecution's case is based solely on suspicion and lacks material evidence
- Whether the petitioner qualifies for bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 303(2), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 303
- robbery
- insufficient evidence
- political enmity
- bail bond
- sureties
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87397 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2025 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Dhananjay Kumar @ Patalpani S/o- Sanjay Ram @ Sanjay Prasad Village -
Durjanchak, P.S- Sakohara, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Suraj Kumar, Advocate
Mr.Ujjwal Shandilya, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Suraj Kumar, along with Mr. Ujjwal
Shandilya, learned counsels appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and Mr. Lalan Kumar, learned APP appearing on
behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Barh P.S. Case No. 351 of 2025 registered under Sections
303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the allegations made in the FIR, while the
informant was selling vegetables at his shop, an unknown
person snatched his money bag containing the cash and fled
away with an accomplice on a motorcycle, and the accused
persons were subsequently identified as Dhananjay Kumar @
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87397 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
2/4
Patalpani (petitioner) and Gedda.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been
falsely implicated in the present case due to political enmity and
local rivalry. The petitioner was not present at the place of
occurrence at the relevant time and his name has surfaced only
on the basis of an alleged disclosure by an unidentified person,
which has no evidentiary value. Neither the petitioner was
apprehended from the place of occurrence nor any incriminating
article has been recovered from his possession, and there is no
independent witness to support the prosecution case. On these
grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, upon perusal of the materials available
on record, this Court finds that the implication of the petitioner
appears to be primarily based on suspicion. The petitioner was
neither apprehended from the place of occurrence nor has any
incriminating article been recovered from his possession, and no
independent witness supported the prosecution case. There is no
cogent material, either direct or circumstantial, to implead the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87397 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
3/4
petitioner with the alleged offence. Considering the nature of the
allegations and the materials on record, I am of the opinion that
the petitioner having clean antecedent has, prima facie, made
out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending
in connection with Barh P.S. Case No. 351 of 2025, subject to
the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
9. The petitioner shall forthwith appear before the
Superintendent of Police concerned along with a copy of this
order and shall cooperate with the investigation as and when
called by the Investigating Officer. In the event the
petitioner fails to participate in the investigation on any
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87397 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
4/4
date, the interim protection granted to the petitioner shall
stand vacated automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…