Patna High Court
Nawal KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioner Nawal Kumar was arrested in connection with a murder alleged under IPC sections 364 and 34. The incident involved the disappearance of a man after traveling to meet his uncle, and the co‑accused Alok Kumar confessed to the killing. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the co‑accused had already been granted bail, that there is no direct evidence against the petitioner, and that mobile CDRs show no communication between the deceased and his brother. The State opposed bail citing four prior convictions of the petitioner. Considering the lack of incriminating material, the lengthy pre‑trial detention of over nine months, and the bail granted to a similarly situated co‑accused, the court ordered bail on a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and conditions of cooperation. The court directed the lower court to release the petitioner.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case under Sections 364 and 34 of the IPC
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail
- Whether the co‑accused’s confession and the absence of direct evidence against the petitioner justify bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 364
Subjects
- bail
- regular bail
- Indian Penal Code
- section 364
- section 34
- co‑accused confession
- criminal antecedents
- pre‑trial detention
- mobile call data records
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50419 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2020 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Nawal Kumar S/o Jibash Choudhary @ Jivash Chaudhary R/o Village-
Jhapaha Dih, P.S.- Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 08-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection
with Meenapur P.S. Case No. 33 of 2020, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 364/34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. As per allegation, the informant’s son returned from
Delhi on 05.01.2020. On 08.01.2020 at about 02:00 PM, he left
his house stating that he was going to village Balakathi,
Motihari to meet his maternal uncle Vijay Bhagat. At about
08:00 PM, the deceased informed his brother on mobile phone
that he had reached Balakothi Chowk and would reach his
uncle’s house shortly. Thereafter, his mobile phone was
switched off and he did not reach his uncle’s house. On the next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50419 of 2025(4) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
day, after search and inquiry from local people, it was alleged
that the accused persons committed his murder, due to previous
enmity.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the co-accused, Alok Kumar @ Golu, who confessed his
guilt and stated that he along with the petitioner, slit the throat
of the deceased, has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of
this Court. As a matter of fact, the deceased had six criminal
antecedents and except for the confessional statement, which
has not led to any recovery, there is nothing against the
petitioner in the entire case diary. She has further submitted that
the petitioner was not residing in the house of the informant,
rather, he was residing in the house of his Nani (maternal
grandmother) and rarely visited the house of the informant. She
has also submitted that the CDR of the mobile phones of the
deceased and his brother was retrieved by the investigating
agency and it was found that there was no conversation between
the deceased and his brother. The petitioner has been in custody
since 22.04.2025.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has
opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner has
four criminal antecedents.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50419 of 2025(4) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
6. The co-accused, who stands on a similar footing,
has been granted bail. The petitioner has been in custody for
more than nine months.
7. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, let the petitioner above-named, is directed to
furnish bail bond and on doing so, the court below shall release the
petitioner on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
CJM, Muzaffarpur in connection with Meenapur P.S. Case No. 33
of 2020, subject to the following conditions that the petitioner
shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself
available as and when required by the court.
8. The petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of
trial and make himself available on each and every date till
conclusion of the trial.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
Nirmal/-
U T
Checking your session…