Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
Rahul Kumar was arrested in connection with a double murder case under Sections 302/34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He applied for bail, claiming he was falsely implicated and not named in the FIR, while the FIR listed other accused. The prosecution relied on confessional statements of co‑accused that allegedly implicated Rahul, and noted that several co‑accused had previously been denied bail by the same court. The petitioner’s counsel argued innocence, but the court considered the seriousness of the offence, the existence of incriminating statements, and the precedent of bail refusals. Consequently, the court refused the bail application, holding that the circumstances did not warrant release on bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case involving Sections 302/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act despite confessional statements implicating him
- Whether the prior denial of bail to co‑accused influences the decision on the petitioner’s bail application
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- confessional statements
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3516 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-336 Year-2024 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/O Kundan Mahato R/O Village- Bintoliya Pokhara, Police
station- Chapra Muffsil, District- Saran, Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Sachida Nand Rai, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, learned counsel for the
Informant and Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
04.01.2025, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 898 of 2024
(Sessions Trial No. 812 of 2025) arising out of Chapra Muffasil
P.S. Case No. 336 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 12.06.2024 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he along
with other co-accused persons have fired upon the Ram Ayodhya
Prasad Yadav and Sunil Kumar as a result of which both of them
have died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3516 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. He further submits that the petitioner is not named in
the F.I.R. and from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that the
informant is an eye witness of the alleged occurrence and he has
filed the present F.I.R. stating therein that seven accused persons,
whose name mentioned in the F.I.R., have fired upon the deceased
persons but it has come during investigation that the confessional
statement of co-accused persons, namely, Ravi Shankar Rai and
Pankaj Kumar were recorded in which they have stated that the
petitioner was also involved in the present crime in question and
petitioner has also fired upon the deceased. Thereafter the
petitioner has also confessed his guilt in the present occurrence
and apart from that the bail petition of co-accused person, namely,
Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Ray has been rejected by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.07.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 26413 of 2025, another bail petition of co-
accused person, namely, Vijay Rai has been rejected by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.07.2025
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27568 of 2025, another bail petition of co-
accused person, namely, Mithun Kumar has been rejected by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.02.2026
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39787 of 2025, another bail petition of co-
accused person, namely, Anish Rai has been rejected by a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3516 of 2026(4) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.03.2026
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 70397 of 2025, another bail petition of co-
accused person, namely, Manoj Rai has been rejected by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.01.2026
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 85399 of 2025, respectively.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned
APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the bail petitions
of similarly situated co-accused persons have been rejected by a
Coordinate Bench of this Court.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case and the fact that the bail petitions of similarly situated co-
accused persons have been rejected by a Coordinate Bench of this
Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
connection with Sessions Trial No. 898 of 2024 (Sessions Trial
No. 812 of 2025) arising out of Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 336
of 2024 pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions
Judge-2nd, Chapra, District- Saran
7. Prayer is refused.
Ibrar//- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
U T
Checking your session…