Patna High Court
Phuldeo Kumar @ Phuldeo SahniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The application for regular bail is rejected.
Summary
The petitioner, Phuldeo Kumar, applied for regular bail in a murder case where the victim was the father of an informant whose body was recovered from a river. The FIR, registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, named unknown accused and relied on a confession allegedly made by the petitioner, which the State claims led to the recovery of an iron rod matching the post‑mortem findings. The petitioner contended that the confession was recorded 20 days after the post‑mortem, was inadmissible, and that no eyewitness or incriminating article was found on him. The State argued that the confession was corroborated by forensic evidence. The Court, after hearing both sides, found the confession credible and the evidence sufficient to deny bail, granting liberty to re‑apply after six months or upon framing of charge.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the alleged confession and forensic corroboration.
- Whether the confession recorded 20 days after the post‑mortem is admissible and reliable.
- Whether the absence of eyewitnesses or recovered incriminating articles on the petitioner precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- confession
- admissibility
- murder
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- post‑mortem
- forensic evidence
- investigation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19747 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-323 Year-2025 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Phuldeo Kumar @ Phuldeo Sahni Son of Anandi Sahni @ Anandi Sahani
Resident of Village - Bahadurpur, P.S.- Minapur (Panapur O.P.), District -
Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shantanu Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
3 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Minapur (Panapur OP)
P.S. Case no. 323 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1) and
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that in the morning of 3.8.2025, he received information that his
father was missing and was not to be found. On search, his dead
body was recovered some distance away in the river. Post-
mortem was conducted. It is further stated that unknown
accused persons had committed the crime.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the FIR
was registered against unknown. There is no eyewitness to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19747 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
occurrence. The petitioner was falsely implicated in the case in
course of investigation on an alleged confessional statement made by
the petitioner before the police which is inadmissible. It is submitted
that contrary to the allegations, no incriminating article has been
recovered from the petitioner’s possession nor can the said rod be
said to be confirmed as the murder weapon. The petitioner is in
custody since 24.8.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the
investigation/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned
counsel for the informant submits that in course of investigation,
on the information provided by the spy, the petitioner was
questioned and he confessed to having committed the crime. It
is the confession which lead to the recovery of the murder
weapon which is an iron rod and the contents of the confession
corroborate the findings in the post-mortem report.
6. In response, it is submitted by learned counsel for
the petitioner that so far as the alleged confession of the
petitioner is concerned, the same has been recorded 20 days
after the conduct of the post-mortem report.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegation in the FIR and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19747 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
material that has transpired in course of investigation as
discussed herein above, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
8. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his
prayer for bail after six months or on framing of charge,
whichever is later.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.