Patna High Court
Jyotish Kumar RanjanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the allegations and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents warranted denial.
Summary
The petitioner, Jyotish Kumar Ranjan, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging he borrowed money, threatened the informant, and opened fire on the informant's house, violating Sections 126(2), 351(2), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, alleging the FIR was fabricated due to a monetary dispute and that a prior FIR filed by him against the informant pre‑dated the present case. The State countered that the petitioner has a prior criminal antecedent (Barari Police Station Case No. 339 of 2017) and habitually carries illegal arms, supported by recovered cartridges and documentary annexures. The court examined the seriousness of the allegations, the recovery of used cartridges, and the petitioner’s alleged criminal history. Concluding that the nature of the accusations and antecedents warranted denial of bail, the court dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged offences under Sections 126(2), 351(2), 352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent and alleged possession of illegal arms justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the FIR is a false or malicious complaint arising from a monetary dispute, affecting the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 126(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal antecedent
- illegal arms
- murder attempt
- loan dispute
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89981 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-223 Year-2025 Thana- KORHA District- Katihar
======================================================
Jyotish Kumar Ranjan Son of Gopal Mandal Resident of Village- Pachma
Ward No. 12, Pachma Milik Marwa, P.S.- Korha, District- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rekha Prasad
Ms. Kumari Priyanka
Ms. Anamika Priyadarshi
For the State : Mr. Akshay Lal Pandit
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
5 06-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel
for the informant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out
of Korha Police Station Case No. 223 of 2025, dated
20.09.2025, disclosing offences under Sections
126(2)/351(2)/352 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and
Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. That the prosecution case, as per the FIR, is that the
informant had lent Rs. 97,000/- to the petitioner and upon
demand of repayment, he refused and threatened him with
dire consequences. It is alleged that on 19.09.2025 at
about 08:30 A.M., the informant stopped the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89981 of 2025(5) dt.06-04-2026
2/4
and asked his money back, the petitioner abused the
informant and threatened to kill him within 24 hours. It is
further alleged that on the same day at about 11:30 P.M.,
the petitioner, along with other accused persons, came
near the informant’s house and opened fire with intention
to kill and upon alarm being raised they fled away.
Subsequently, on information by the informant, the police
reached at the place of occurrence and recovered three
empty cartridges. It has also been alleged that the
petitioner and other returned and open fired again on the
same night.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence
in the manner alleged. She next submits that the petitioner
has falsely been implicated in the present case due to
monetary dispute on the basis of concocted story. She
further submits that the present case has been lodged by
the informant to save his own skin from loot of Rs. 9
Lakh for which FIR, bearing no. Korha Police Station
Case No. 220 of 2025, has been lodged by the petitioner
against the informant and others, which is prior in time to
the present FIR. The petitioner, though named in other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89981 of 2025(5) dt.06-04-2026
3/4
cases, but the same have been lodged by the side of the
informant.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant and
the State, vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and
submits that the petitioner has concealed another criminal
antecedent having Barari Police Station Case No. 339 of
2017. Referring to the seizure list, learned counsel
submits that three used cartridges have been recovered
from the place of occurrence. It has further been
submitted that the petitioner is habitual offender and is in
habit of carrying illegal arms (pistol), which would be
evident from Annexure-2 series annexed to the counter
affidavit.
6. In reply, learned counsel for the petitioner submits in the
criminal antecedent, bearing Barari Police Station Case
No. 339 of 2017, as referred above, the petitioner was not
named in the FIR rather his name transpired on
confessional statement. With regard to the alleged
possession of illegal arms, it is submitted that a valid
license shall be produced at the time of hearing.
7. Regards being had to the submissions made by the parties
and taking into consideration the nature of allegation,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89981 of 2025(5) dt.06-04-2026
4/4
recovery of used cartridges from place of occurrence and
criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to
grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. This application is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
ashwani/-
U T
Checking your session…