Patna High Court
Saheb Ali @ Saheb AnsariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail, holding that the petitioner’s inclusion in the FIR based on co‑accused confessions warrants further investigation and possible custodial interrogation.
Summary
Petitioner Saheb Ali sought anticipatory bail after learning that he was named in FIR No. 195 of 2025 for offences under sections 317(3-5) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 and sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. The FIR arose from a police raid that recovered weapons and motorcycles and recorded confessions of several co‑accused, whose statements implicated the petitioner. The petitioner contended that no overt act was alleged against him, no stolen property was found in his possession, and he had no criminal antecedent. The court observed that the petitioner’s name was recorded solely on the basis of co‑accused confessions and that the investigation was ongoing, necessitating possible custodial interrogation. Consequently, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the petitioner is named in the FIR solely on the basis of co‑accused confessional statements.
- Whether the absence of an overt act or recovery of stolen property from the petitioner’s possession precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the continuation of investigation and the need for custodial interrogation justify denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 317(3), 317(4), 317(5), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- confessional statements
- Arms Act
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- investigation
- custodial interrogation
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9273 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2025 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Saheb Ali @ Saheb Ansari S/O Abbas Miyan @ Abbas Ansari R/O Village-
Munja (Bakhri) P.S.- Baikunthpur, Dist.- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjiv Kumar
Mr. Prasoon Shekhar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-03-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 195 of 2025 dated 01.06.2025
registered under section 317(3), 317(4), 317(5), 3(5) of the
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita 2023 as well as section 25(1-B)(a), 26 &
35 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the F.I.R. on 30.05.2025 during patrolling near
Gadhahiya More the Police found three persons riding on a
motorcycle coming from the side of Hamidpur. Upon seeing the
Police party, they started fleeing away but were arrested by the
Police and they disclosed their name as Vivek Kumar, Kamalesh
Kumar and Chandan Kumar. Regarding the papers of the
motorcyel, none of them gave any satisfactory reply, however,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9273 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
Vivek Kumar and Kamalesh Kumar confessed their involvement
in many offences of theft of bikes and other things. The Police
team also recovered a “Deshi Katta”, one live cartridge and one
Pulsar Motorcycle from the house of Vivek Kumar. On the
confession of Kamalesh Kumar the Police visited the house of
maternal uncle of Kamalesh Kumar and recovered one “Deshi
Katta”, one live cartridge and a Hero Honda Splendor
Motorcycle. Thereafter, the Police team visited the house of
Saddam Husain and arrested him and on his confession Police
recovered a Hero Honda Shine Motorcycle. Accordingly, the
present F.I.R. was lodged against eleven persons including the
petitioner- Saheb Ali @ Saheb Ansari.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
is innocent and he has not committed any offence in the manner
alleged. He further submits that in the body of the F.I.R. no
overt act has been alleged against the petitioner, however, in the
last portion of the F.I.R. only the name of petitioner has been
mentioned. He next submits that no looted motorcycle and / or
any theft article has been recovered from the conscious
possession or premises of the petitioner. The petitioner is having
no criminal antecedent.
5. Regard being had to the submission made by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9273 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
petitioner, taking into consideration the fact that from the
impugned order it appears that name of the petitioner has
transpired on the basis of confessional statement of the co-
accused, investigation in the case is still going on, the nature of
offence and confessional statement may be the basis of further
investigation for which custodial interrogation of the petitioner
may be required, accordingly, I am not inclined to grant
anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.