Patna High Court
Kundan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted because the petitioner was implicated through a self‑incriminating statement, had confessed, and the trial had already commenced, indicating the seriousness of the offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Kundan Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 393, 307 and 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code relating to robbery and murder. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was stabbed during a loot and later died, and that the petitioner’s involvement was established through a self‑incriminating statement of a co‑accused and the petitioner’s own confession. The petitioner contended that there was no legal evidence against him and that he was innocent. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the fact that the trial had already commenced with three witnesses examined. The court, recalling its earlier order, held that the gravity of the offences, the petitioner’s confession and the commencement of trial warranted denial of bail. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in offences punishable under Sections 393, 307 and 302/34 of the IPC
- Whether a self‑incriminating statement of a co‑accused and the petitioner’s own confession preclude bail
- Whether the commencement of trial and examination of witnesses affect the grant of bail
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged robbery‑murder offence justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 34, 393
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- murder
- robbery
- self‑incriminating statement
- trial commencement
- gravity of offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49691 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-180 Year-2024 Thana- PATNA GRP CASE District- Patna
======================================================
Kundan Kumar S/o Bindeshwar Singh R/o - Saidpur, P.S.- Kadamkuan,
Distt.- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Nityanand Kumar, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Fahimuddin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail in connection with GRP, Patna
P.S.Case No. 180 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 393, 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected vide order dated 26.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc.
No.55611 of 2024 which reads as under:-
“ Heard learned counsel for
the petitioner and learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in
connection with GRP, Patna P.S.Case No.
180 of 2024 registered for the offence
under section 393,307,302/34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49691 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026
2/3 perso
3. As per the prosecution case,
one person was found in injured condition
who was admitted to hospital where he
died. Subsequently during investigation, it
has come that unknown criminals had
committed a loot and stabbed him be
cause of which he died.
4. Learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner is
innocent and has committed no offence.
There is no legal evidence against the
petitioner and the petitioner has been
arrested on the confessional statement of
co-accused and, therefore, he deserves
bail.
5. Learned APP appearing for
the State opposes the prayer for regular
bail of the petitioner.
6. the petitioner is accused of
killing the deceased while trying to commit
a loot. The petitioner was caught on the
self inclupatory statement of co-accused.
The petitioner has also confessed his guilt
and on his statement, the lootted tiffin
carrier has been recovered. The petitioner
is in jail since 18.04.2024.
7. Considering the aforesaid
facts and circumstances of the case, I am
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioenr
and therefore, the present bail application
is hereby rejected.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the trial has started and three witnesses have been examined.
5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact
that the trial has started, I am not inclined to review my earlier
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49691 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026
3/3 perso
order.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
N.K/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.