Patna High Court
Uday Paswan @ Udai PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner, finding the allegations serious and the evidence sufficient to justify continued custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Uday Paswan, applied for bail in a case involving kidnapping, murder and related offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the informant’s son was kidnapped during a Saraswati Puja procession and later found dead, and that the petitioner was implicated based on a confessional statement of co‑accused J.K. (Chandan Paswan). The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that the FIR does not name him, and that the confessional statement lacks evidentiary value, also pointing to the grant of bail to other co‑accused. The State opposed bail, relying on the confession naming the petitioner and the seriousness of the charges. The Court held that, given the nature of the accusations, the seriousness of the offences and the lack of direct evidence, bail could not be granted. Consequently, the bail prayer was rejected and the trial court was directed to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether a confessional statement of a co‑accused can be relied upon to deny bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the alleged offences and risk of tampering justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(1), 140(2), 3(5), 351(3), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- kidnapping
- murder
- confessional statement
- evidentiary value
- serious offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59474 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Uday Paswan @ Udai Paswan S/O Rajendra Paswan R/O Village- Mahuwari,
P.S - Akorigola, District- Rohtas at Sasaram.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Vikalp, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Akorigola P.S. Case No. 30 of 2025, instituted for the offences
punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(2), 140(1), 352, 351(3)
and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the
informant’s son got kidnapped from his house while the
Saraswati Puja procession was passing through his house. It is
further alleged that the informant’s son and daughter of Anil
Paswan were having love affair. When the Informant enquired
about his son from Anil Paswan then he was threatened with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59474 of 2025(3) dt.30-01-2026
2/3
dire consequences with regard to his son by the FIR named
accused persons. It is further alleged that, later on, the dead
body of the deceased was recovered by the police.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there is no
specific or direct allegation of any overt act against the
petitioner rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The
petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name has surfaced in
this case in course of investigation on the basis of confessional
statement of the co-accused J.K. @ Chandan Paswan recorded
before the police which has got no evidentiary value in the eye
of law. The petitioner happens to be the relative of co-accused
Anil Paswan whose daughter was having love affair with the
deceased and, only due to this reason, the petitioner has been
implicated in the present case. The petitioner is in custody since
17.02.2025 and has got two criminal antecedents in which he is
on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that
other co-accused have been granted regular bail by this Court
vide order dated 01.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 28188 of
2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59474 of 2025(3) dt.30-01-2026
3/3
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the petitioner. It is next submitted that the witnesses have
supported the prosecution case in paragraph nos. 4, 12 and 13 of
the case diary. On perusal of paragraph no. 57 of the case diary,
it transpires that co-accused J.K. @ Chandan Paswan has
confessed the name of the petitioner and has levelled specific
allegation against him of killing the deceased. Hence, the
petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the Trial.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…