Md. Dilshan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16639 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Md. Dilshan son of Md. Parwej @ Md. Paewej Alam Resident of VillageManjil Mubarak P.s.- Kalyanpur District -Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Om Prakash Om, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Kalyanpur P. S. Case No. 58 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per F.I.R., on 21.02.2025 at about 7 PM, when informant was going to Pusa, on the way, three unknown miscreants, riding on a motorcycle, stopped informant and snatched away his motorcycle and laptop on the point of pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.. Name of petitioner transpired in this case during investigation, merely on the basis of confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16639 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026 2/2 statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar and Sujeet Kumar. Save and except confessional statement, there is no material on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in the alleged occurrence. No looted articles were recovered from possession of this petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that name of petitioner transpired in this case during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Nitish Kumar and Sujeet Kumar, who confessed regarding active role played by all the accused persons, including this petitioner, in commission of the offence. Petitioner has got one criminal antecedent of similar nature.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, materials that have surfaced during investigation and criminal antecedent of the petitioner, prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T