Patna High Court
Sudhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The petitioner is not entitled to bail as the allegations against him are substantiated by the accused witness’s statement.
Summary
Sudhir Kumar was arrested in connection with a murder case (PS Sahpur Case No. 773 of 2023) involving offences under Sections 363, 365, 34, 307, 302, 201 and 120B of the IPC. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that he is not named in the FIR and that the key witness, Nisha Kumari, who is also an accused, gave a statement implicating him. The informant, father of the deceased, contended that Nisha Kumari’s statement under Section 164 of the CrPC clearly identified Sudhir Kumar as the person who strangulated the victim. The court examined the credibility of Nisha Kumari’s statement, noting her status as an accused, and concluded that the petitioner could not be granted the privilege of bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected and the trial was directed to be expedited.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner Sudhir Kumar is entitled to regular bail in a murder case despite being implicated by an accused witness.
- Whether the statement of an accused witness (Nisha Kumari) under Section 164 CrPC can be given credence for bail considerations.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302, 307, 34, 363, 365
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- CrPC
- witness credibility
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60657 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-773 Year-2023 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Sudhir Kumar S/O Sri Binod Rai @ Vinod Ray Resident of village- Hetanpur,
P.S.- Sahpur, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Alok Kumar Rahi, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
informant and learned APP for the State.
2. In this case, the petitioner is seeking regular bail in
connection with Sahpur P.S. Case No. 773 of 2023, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 363, 365, 34 of the IPC and
additional Sections 307, 302, 201 and 120B of the IPC
3. The informant is father of the deceased. According to
his fardbeyan, his son Abhishek Kumar (the deceased) had love and
affection with Nisha Kumari. The maternal uncle and uncle of Nisha
Kumari were threatening his son. It is further alleged that co-accused
Chandan Kumar, Raju Kumar, Manish Kumar, Kishori Rai, Pintu
Kumar and Krishna Rai and others, called his son and thereafter, his
son is traceless.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60657 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. He is not named in the FIR. The present case has been
lodged on 16.12.2023 and Nisha Kumari, with whom, son of the
informant (the deceased) had love and affection, has lodged a case on
15.12.2023. Nisha Kumari, in her fardbeyan, has stated that she had
love and affection with Abhishek Kumar for three years. Her uncle
saw her talking with Abhishek Kumar and thereafter, her uncle
assaulted her due to which, she went out from her house, with intent
to commit suicide but Pintu Kumar and Sudhir Kumar (the
petitioner) made her sit on motorcycle and brought her to the hospital
in injured condition. Learned counsel has further submitted that the
victim has been made accused along with her mother. The family
members of Nisha Kumari and her maternal inmates have been
named in the FIR but not this petitioner. It has also been submitted
that Nisha Kumari has also lodged a complaint case. The petitioner is
a person of clean antecedent and is in custody since 21.05.2025.
5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant
has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that murder of the
deceased was taken place before the eye of Nisha Kumari. She, in her
statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has stated that co-accused
Chandan Kumar and Pintu Kumar caught hold of him and the present
petitioner strangulated Abhishek Kumar (the deceased) to death.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
statement of Nisha Kumari should not be given credence since she,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.60657 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
herself is accused in this case to which learned counsel for the
informant replied that merely because, she has love and affection
with the deceased, she was made accused and she has no complicity
in the murder of the victim.
7. According to the statement of Nisha Kumari, who had
love and affection with the deceased, the petitioner strangulated
Abhishek Kumar to death.
8. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
circumstances, in my view, the petitioner does not deserve privilege
of bail. Accordingly, it is rejected.
9. The learned Court below is directed to expedite the
trial and to conclude the trial as early as possible.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
priyanka/-
U T
Checking your session…