Patna High Court
KRISHNA KUMAR @ KRISHNA SAHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Krishna Kumar was arrested in connection with a murder case (IPC sections 302, 201) and later charged under sections 120B and 34. The deceased was the son of an informant whose body was recovered near a railway track. The informant initially lodged an FIR against unknown persons but, after seven months, altered his statement to allege that the petitioner was involved in the killing due to a personal dispute. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the only incriminating material was a mobile tower location, which could be explained by his presence at a marriage ceremony, and highlighted his lack of prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, citing the informant’s later statements and witness accounts linking the petitioner to the crime scene. The High Court, after weighing the weak evidentiary basis and the petitioner’s custody since June 2025, granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged with murder, culpable homicide not amounting to murder, and conspiracy under IPC sections 302, 201, 120B and 34.
- Whether the informant’s delayed change of statement and mobile tower location constitute sufficient grounds to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- IPC sections 302 201 120B 34
- mobile location evidence
- informant statement
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86477 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2024 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
KRISHNA KUMAR @ KRISHNA SAH Son of Madan Sah R/o Village -
Malikana Bagahi, P.S.- Motipur, District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Suraj Narain Yadav, Advocate
Mr.Masoom Alam, Advocate
Ms. Niraj Prasad Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under sections 302, 201 of
the Indian Penal Code and later one Section 120 (B)/34 of the
Indian Penal Code added.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the dead body
of the son of the informant who was running a tent house, was
found near a railway track.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86477 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the
FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants. During the course
of investigation, the informant gave his re-statement in
paragraph -6 of the case diary. However, in paragraph-46 of the
case diary, after seven months of the occurrence, the informant
developed a new story and stated that he came to know that the
deceased was killed by the petitioner and others, as the deceased
was having affair with the daughter of one Dinesh Sha. The
informant has stated that he came to know about this fact a few
days after the occurrence. It is further submitted that save and
except the statement of the informant made after seven months
of the occurrence that the petitioner is involved in the
commission of the murder of the informant’s son, there is
nothing on record against him. It is further submitted that
similarly situated accused person, namely, Dinesh Sah has
already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 11.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83704 of
2025.
5. Learned counsel appearing for the Informant has
vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail, submitting that
at paragraph nos. 52 and 53 of the case diary, the witnesses have
stated that on the date of the marriage ceremony where the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86477 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
deceased had worked for tent arrangement, the petitioner was
searching for the deceased. It is further submitted that from a
perusal of paragraph-70 of the case diary, it transpires that the
mobile location of the petitioner was found near the place where
the dead body of the deceased was recovered.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that so far as the tower location is concerned, the
petitioner was also an invite at the said marriage ceremony and
therefore, it is natural that his mobile tower location would be
reflected in that area. A perusal of paragraph-70 of the case
diary, it is clear that only the tower of location was found near
the place of occurrence and the place where body of the
deceased was recovered. Save and except this, there is nothing
against the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in
judicial custody since 30.06.2025 having no criminal
antecedent.
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
bail in connection with Motipur P.S. Case No. 55 of 2024 on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86477 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
Sessions Judge – XVI, Muzaffarpur.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-
U T
Checking your session…