Ranjan Kumar Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14659 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2025 Thana- UCHKAGAON District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar Manjhi S/o Late Rajendra Manjhi R/o Village - Birvat Bazar, P.s - Uchkagaon, District - Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Arbind Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Devashish Giri, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 18-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 109, 3 (5) of the BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that while the informant was sleeping at the door of his house, he saw two persons who had covered their faces and were on a Splendor motorcycle, and they fired at the informant on his back.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. During the course

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14659 of 2026(3) dt.18-04-2026 2/3 of investigation, on the basis of a secret informant, the petitioner was apprehended and his confessional statement was recorded, wherein he has stated that he had conducted reconnaissance (reiki), whereas the co-accused persons, namely Chhotu @ Manir and Israfil, had fired at the informant. It is further submitted that a confessional statement made before the police is not admissible in evidence and cannot be treated as substantive material.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that the motorcycle used in the commission of the offence has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner, and the injury report indicates that the firearm injury was inflicted on a vital part of the informant.

6. Upon consideration of the materials on record, it appears that, save and except the confessional statement, there is no substantive material against the petitioner, and even in the said confessional statement, the allegation of firing is not attributed to him. The petitioner is in custody since 01.10.2025.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14659 of 2026(3) dt.18-04-2026 3/3 bail in connection with Uchkagaon P.S. Case No. 366 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-1, Gopalganj. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T