Patna High Court

Tabrej MiyanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 13 February 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

The court denied bail to the petitioner, holding that the seriousness of the charges and the material collected justified refusal.

Summary

The petitioner Tabrej Miyan was charged with murder of an informant's husband and concealment of the body under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34. He applied for bail, arguing there were no eyewitnesses and that the only incriminating material was the confessional statements of co‑accused Anita Devi and Najir Alam, which he claimed lacked evidentiary value, and that he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, pointing to material collected during investigation, the seriousness of the offence, the petitioner’s presence at the crime scene, and the fact that he surrendered only after a long period. The bench considered whether the seriousness of the charges and the existence of corroborative material justified denial of bail despite the alleged lack of direct evidence. Concluding that the allegations were grave and that sufficient material existed against the petitioner, the court refused bail. The petition for bail was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted to an accused of murder and concealment of a dead body under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the IPC.
Whether the confessional statements of co‑accused persons have evidentiary value sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Whether the absence of eyewitnesses and lack of motive on the part of the petitioner affect the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34

Subjects

bail
murder
IPC
Section 302
Section 201
Section 34
criminal procedure
confession
co-accused

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50639 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-400 Year-2023 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Tabrej Miyan Son of Rajak Miyan R/o Village - Jamla, P.S.- Muffasil,
                 District- East Champaran.
                                                                      ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                               ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr.Brajesh Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr.Binod Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   13-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian

                   Penal Code.

                                3. Petitioner along with other accused persons are

                   said to have committed murder of the husband of the informant

                   and concealed the dead body.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   there is no eye witness to this case and the petitioner has been

                   made an accused only on account of suspicion and confessional

                   statement of the co-accused persons, namely, Anita Devi and

                   Najir Alam which has no evidentiary value. The petitioner also

                   did not have any motive to kill the deceased rather as per the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50639 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       material collected during course of investigation, the co-accused

                       persons had definite motive of killing the deceased. Further, the

                       petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2025 with no criminal

                       antecedent.

                                    5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the

                       application for bail on the ground that there are materials

                       collected     against      the    petitioner     during   the   course   of

                       investigation and it is a serious case of the deceased being killed

                       and his dead body being thrown away. This petitioner was also

                       last seen with the deceased at the meat shop which and further

                       the case is of the year 2023 and the petitioner only surrendered

                       on 02.04.2025.

                                        6. Taking into consideration the facts and

                       circumstances and also considering the seriousness of the

                       allegations coupled with the material collected against the

                       petitioner during the course of investigation, I am not inclined to

                       enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is

                       rejected in connection Motihari Muffasil P.S. Case No. 400 of

                       2023.


                                                 (Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…