Patna High Court
Kamdev Paswan @ Ranjeet PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail, holding that the petitioner’s involvement as indicated in the co‑accused’s confessional statements and the gravity of the offences warranted rejection of the application.
Summary
The petitioner, Kamdev Paswan, filed a second anticipatory bail application fearing arrest in a murder case (IPC §§302, 201, 34) arising from the death of Khushi Kumari. The FIR alleged that the petitioner’s son, Dewvrat Paswan, and another co‑accused murdered the victim and that the petitioner’s name appeared in the confessional statements of the co‑accused. The petitioner argued that there was no direct or circumstantial evidence against him and that he was being made a scapegoat. The court noted the seriousness of the offences and the fact that the petitioner’s name was disclosed during investigation, which could further substantiate the case. Having already rejected the first anticipatory bail application and finding no new material or change in circumstances, the court dismissed the second anticipatory bail plea.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the only evidence against the petitioner is the confessional statements of co‑accused.
- Whether a second anticipatory bail application can be entertained in the absence of any new material or change in circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- confessional statement
- IPC
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27820 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2024 Thana- ALOULI District- Khagaria
======================================================
Kamdev Paswan @ Ranjeet Paswan Son of Lt. Sukhdev Paswan R/O Vill.-
Kehuna Sumbha, P.S.- Bahadurpur O.P. (Alauli), Distt.- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pankaj Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-05-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. This is second anticipatory bail application on
behalf of the petitioner who apprehends his arrest in connection
with Alauli P.S. Case No.105 / 2024 corresponding to G.R. No.
788 / 2024 dated 19.03.2024 registered for the offence under
Section 302, 201, 34 of the I.P.C.
3. As per the F.I.R. on 17.03.2024 at about 6:00 A.M.
the informant came to know through mobile that his sister
-Khushi Kumari went missing. During search, the informant got
to know that dead body of a girl has been found floating in the
river. The informant and his family members went to identify
the body. The body was having the part below the neck and
above the stomach. From the bangles and tattoo marks, it was
identified as the body of the victim Khushi Kumari. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27820 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
2/3
informant alleged that his sister was in love with the co-accused
Dewvrat Paswan. The informant has further alleged that all the
accused persons have murdered his sister and threw her dead
body in the river. The name of the petitioner has surfaced during
investigation in the confessional statement of the co-accused /
Niraj Mukhiya and Dewvrat Paswan.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
except confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no
direct or circumstantial evidence against the petitioner. He
further submits that being the father of the co-accused namely
Dewvrat Paswan, the petitioner has been made scape -goat in
this case. He next submits that in the trial before the court below
six witnesses have been examined but none of the witnesses has
supported the prosecution against the petitioner.
5. After taking into consideration the gravity of the
offence and the fact that name of the petitioner has been
disclosed by the co-accused during the course of investigation
which may be the basis of further investigation against the
petitioner, this court earlier rejected the prayer for anticipatory
bail on the merit of the case.
6. Again, a second anticipatory bail application has
been filed and learned counsel for the petitioner tried to re-argue
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27820 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
3/3
the matter. I do not find any merit or subsequent event for
consideration of anticipatory bail application filed for the
second time. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…