Patna High Court
Loha Singh @ Dipu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to regular bail.
Summary
Loha Singh was arrested in connection with PS case No.1237 of 2025 for the alleged murder of an informant’s son, with the FIR alleging his presence in CCTV footage alongside two others. The petitioner contended that the confessional statement recorded in police custody has no evidentiary value, there is no eye‑witness, and the FIR was lodged after a delay of one and a half months, weakening the prosecution’s case. The State opposed the grant of bail. The court examined the nature of the evidence, the delay in filing the FIR, and the lack of direct witnesses. It directed that the petitioner be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail‑bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the petitioner accused of murder under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether a confessional statement made in police custody is admissible as evidence.
- Whether the absence of eye‑witnesses and the delay in lodging the FIR justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- CCTV evidence
- confessional statement
- delay in FIR
- B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23559 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1237 Year-2025 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Loha Singh @ Dipu Kumar S/O Dinesh Rai @ Dinesh Ray R/O Village-
Pipapul Akhara Ghat, P.S- Danapur, District- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Sinha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No.
1237 of 2025 dated 01.12.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. As per the allegation, the son of the informant went
out of his house and thereafter did not return home till evening,
the informant and his family members started searching him. It
has further been alleged that on 19.10.2025, the dead body of
his son was found near Devaniya Drainage, Danapur, the
informant lodged a written complaint in Danapur Police Station.
It has further been alleged that on 12.11.2025, police gathered a
video footage from the CCTV camera which was installed near
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23559 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026
2/3
Devaniya and it transpired that named accused persons
including the petitioner were present and he expressed full
belief that his son was done to death by all the three named
accused persons including the petitioner. It has further been
alleged that when the dead body of his son was recovered, all
the three accused persons concealed themselves.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
U.D. Case No. 31 of 2025 was registered upon the disclosure of
unidentified dead body and post-mortem came to be done. It has
further been submitted that pursuant to the petitioner being
named in the FIR, he was arrested and confessional statement
before the police while in police custody was taken which has
got no evidentiary value in the eye of law. The CCTV footage as
alleged in the FIR may form part of investigation which was
going on earlier and this case has not been lodged by any of the
police officer rather on wisdom of the informant, this FIR came
to be lodged. It has further been submitted that there is no eye-
witness to the alleged occurrence of murder and the case has
been lodged after about one and a half months. It has further
been submitted that petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2025
and he was made accused in one another case but not of similar
nature and he is on bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23559 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026
3/3
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Heard the parties and perused the record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
as well as nature of evidence against the petitioner, the
petitioner above-named is directed to be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Court concerned, Patna in connection with Danapur P.S.
Case No. 1237 of 2025.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.