Patna High Court
Suman Kumar Yadav @ Suman KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The bail application was denied.
Summary
The petitioner, Suman Kumar Yadav, applied for regular bail in a case involving alleged murder and illegal possession of arms, charged under sections 103, 302(2), 62 of the B.N.S. and section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleged that two unknown persons shot the informant's father, who later died, and the petitioner claims he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and has no incriminating material against him. The petitioner highlighted that co‑accused who confessed were granted bail, while the State pointed to the petitioner’s mobile phone tower data placing him near the crime scene and his history of 13 prior cases. The court examined the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner against the State’s circumstantial evidence and his criminal antecedents. Concluding that the petitioner did not merit the privilege of bail, the court rejected the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the absence of his name in the FIR and lack of direct incriminating evidence.
- Whether the mobile phone tower location and the petitioner’s prior criminal record justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- arms act
- mobile phone location evidence
- criminal antecedents
- high court
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44570 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2025 Thana- Marnga District- Purnia
======================================================
Suman Kumar Yadav @ Suman Kumar S/O Late Yogendra Yadav R/O
Village- Ranga Kol (Rangakil), P.S- Falka, Distt.- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Maranga P.S. Case No.
16 of 2025 dated 17.01.2025 registered for the offences
punishable u/ss 103, 302(2), 62 read with Section 3(5) of the
B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation, as per the fardbayan of the
informant Md. Asafak Alam, is that at about 2:00 A.M., on
hearing noise, two unknown persons on a motorcycle allegedly
fired at the informant’s father when he questioned them about
the noise in the village, causing injury to his left thigh. He later
died during treatment and the FIR was lodged against the
unknown persons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44570 of 2025(3) dt.20-01-2026
2/2
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case. Except for the confessional statements of the co-
accused persons, there is nothing against the petitioner. He is not
named in the FIR. No incriminating articles were recovered
from the possession of the petitioner. He has further submitted
that the co-accused persons, who have confessed their guilt,
have been granted bail.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State, by
drawing my attention towards paragraph nos. 37, 38 and 39 of
the case diary, submitted that the tower location of the
petitioner’s mobile phone was found near the place of
occurrence and that he has very strong criminal antecedents of
13 cases.
6. In my view, the petitioner does not deserve the
privileges of bail, which is hereby rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
Nirmal/-
U T
Checking your session…