Ranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 87429 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2025 Thana- GORAUL District- Vaishali ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar S/o Late Surendra Singh R/o Village- Bhagwatpur, P.SVaishali, Dist- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shivjee Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Goraul PS Case No. 394 of 2025 dated 11-07-2025, instituted for the offence punishable under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 corresponding to Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was one of the members of a group of 5-6 persons who in furtherance of their common intention committed robbery at gun point on 11.07.2025 at about 9:44 PM at Kolkata Alankar Jewellers and Utensils Store, situated at Inayat Nagar. It is alleged that the accused persons while armed with firearms threatened the informant and forcibly looted approximately 440
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 87429 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/3 grams of gold jewellery worth about Rs. 34 lakhs, 7 kg 155 grams of silver jewellery worth about Rs. 5 lakhs along with his Vivo mobile phone and Aadhaar card, and thereafter fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR was instituted against unknown persons and the name of the petitioner surfaced only on the basis of the alleged confessional statement of co-accused Kundan Kumar. It is further submitted that the said co-accused is a co-villager of the petitioner and due to personal grudge has falsely implicated him in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged recovery is wholly false and that the police forcibly obtained the petitioner's signature on a blank paper, which was later converted into a seizure list. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 29.07.2025 and has only one criminal antecedent bearing Vaishali P.S. Case No. 99 of 2024 under Section 395 IPC, in which he is already on bail. Charge-sheet has been submitted in the instant case on 20.09.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 87429 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 3/3 arrested in connection with the present case and stolen articles have been recovered from his possession. It is further submitted that other stolen articles were also recovered from the possession of co-accused Kundan Kumar. It is next submitted that the petitioner has a criminal antecedent of similar nature, i.e., Vaishali P.S. Case No. 99 of 2024 under Section 395 IPC and, therefore, he appears to be a habitual offender.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the allegation, the manner in which the offence has been committed, the recovery of stolen articles from the possession of the petitioner and his criminal antecedent of similar nature, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is rejected.
8. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and take all endeavour to conclude the trial at the earliest, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt or production of a copy of this order. (Khatim Reza, J) shyambihari/- U