Patna High Court
Sandeep Kumar @ Sandip KumarversusThe State Of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed and bail is granted to the appellant, setting aside the lower court’s order denying bail.
Summary
The appellant, Sanjay Kumar, was charged under Sections 302, 201 and 120B of the IPC and several provisions of the SC/ST Act for the alleged murder of the informant’s son, who was said to have been throttled and his body disposed of in a water body. The prosecution’s case relied on the informant’s statement and a confessional statement of a co‑accused who implicated the appellant, while the defence argued that the appellant was not named in the FIR and that the allegations under the SC/ST Act were unfounded. The trial court had denied bail, but the appellant appealed to the Patna High Court. The High Court examined whether the charge‑sheet specifically implicated the appellant and whether the SC/ST provisions were attracted, finding the allegations insufficiently specific. Consequently, the Court set aside the lower court’s order, allowed the appeal and granted bail with conditions. The appellant was released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and compliance with stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is sufficiently implicated in the murder charge to justify denial of bail.
- Whether the allegations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention) Act are made out against the appellant.
- Whether a co‑accused’s confessional statement alone can sustain the denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- conspiracy
- SC/ST Act
- confession
- charge sheet
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1992 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-88 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDRAMANDI District- Jamui
======================================================
Sandeep Kumar @ Sandip Kumar S/O Sri Ramjeevan Singh @ Ramjeev
Kumar Singh R/O Vill.- Bhoraha, P.s.- Simri Bakhtiyarpur, Dist.- Saharsa
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Fulwa Devi W/O Kailash Das R/O Vill.- Peterpahari, P.s.- Chakai, Dist.-
Jamui, Present R/O Motimahal Chakai, P.s.- Chakai, Dist.- Jamui
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 05.04.2025 passed by learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamui whereby the prayer for
bail of the appellant in connection with Chandramandih PS Case
No. 88 of 2024 instituted under Sections 302, 201 & 120B of
the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v) & 3(2)
(va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1992 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
2/4
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that informant alleged
that her son, Chhotu Kumar @ Raj Kumar Paswan, was called
by Kumar Vijay Raj @ Vijay Kumar, Nisi Raj, Darvesh Kumar
@ Dharmesh Kumar, Sanjay Kumar (appellant) and unknown
persons and was killed by throttling pursuant to a prior
conspiracy. It is stated that the accused thereafter threw his dead
body in Ghormo Bahiyar to conceal the offence, and were found
absconding when she went to enquire. The informant, after
being alerted by villagers, reached Ghormo Bahiyar and
identified the dead body of her son, suspecting the named
accused due to an earlier quarrel and threats.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Appellant is not named in the FIR. The name of the appellant
has transpired in re-statement of the informant. There is no
specific allegation against the appellant, rather the same is
general and omnibus in nature. Learned counsel for the
appellant further submits that the appellant has not taken the
caste name of the informant in public view. Hence, no offence
under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out against him. The
appellant has no intention to disgrace the image of the informant
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1992 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
3/4
in public view. The appellant is in custody since 26.06.2024 and
has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned Special P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant. It is
submitted that co-accused has confessed his guilt in his
confessional statement and has specifically stated the role of the
appellant. As per postmortem report, cause of death is
mechanical asphyxia caused by strangulation.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to allow this appeal.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated 05.04.2025
passed by learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I,
Jamui is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellant be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Fifteen thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Chandramandih PS
Case No. 88 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the
family of the appellant.
(II) The appellant shall appear on each and every date
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1992 of 2025(4) dt.05-02-2026
4/4
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the appellant.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…