Patna High Court
Md. SidhikiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Sidhiki, was implicated in a train robbery that resulted in the death of a passenger, Kajal Kumari, and charged under Sections 61(2), 112, 307, 305(a), 313 of the B.N.S and Section 66 of the Information Technology Act. The prosecution’s case relied solely on a confessional statement made by a co‑accused, Aman Kumar, with no other material linking the petitioner to the offences. The petitioner, who had been in custody since 27‑04‑2025, sought bail, arguing the lack of substantive evidence and pointing to the bail granted to similarly situated co‑accused. The State opposed the bail on the seriousness of the offences. The Court held that a police confession of a co‑accused has no evidentiary value for bail purposes and, noting the absence of other proof and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to attendance conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the only evidence against the petitioner is a confessional statement of a co‑accused.
- Whether a police confession of a co‑accused is admissible for the purpose of bail determination.
- Whether the grant of bail to similarly situated co‑accused influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 112, 305(a), 307, 313, 61(2)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66
Subjects
- bail
- confession
- co‑accused
- train robbery
- death of victim
- evidentiary value
- criminal procedure
- Section 66 IT Act
- Sections 61(2) 112 307 305(a) 313 B.N.S
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72315 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGALPUR RAIL P.S. District-
Bhagalpur
======================================================
Md. Sidhiki Son of Late Mohdat @ Late Gulam Mohammad Resident of
village - Khariyara, P.S.- Barahat, District - Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brij Nandan Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 61 (2), 112, 307, 305 (a), 313 of
B.N.S and section 66 of Information and Technology Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant along with
his family was returning home from train. When the train reached
near Sabour, Bhagalpur, some unknown miscreants forcibly entered
Coach No. S-3 and attempted to snatch a bag belonging to the
informant’s daughter. The said bag contained cash amounting to Rs.
3,000/-, a mobile phone (Realme C15) with JIO SIM No.
9931959581, and certain important documents. While attempting to
resist and chase the miscreant, the victim, Kajal Kumari, was pushed
near the gate of the running train, due to which she fell down and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72315 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
sustained grievous injuries and during the course of treatment she
died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons and the name of the
petitioner transpired, subsequently, during the course of
investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused
Aman Kumar. It is further submitted that besides the confessional
statement, there is no other cogent material collected against the
petitioner during the course of investigation. Further, it has been
submitted that petitioner is languishing in custody since 27.04.2025
and after commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charges
have also been framed. It has also been submitted that similarly
situated two co-accused persons namely Md. Filtar and Md. Sinku
have already been granted bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court
vide order dated 05.01.2026 and 06.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
71947 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 71942 of 2025 respectively.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail
of the petitioner.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of
the case and also considering the fact that there is no other material
but confession before police which has no evidentiary value in the
eyes of law, coupled with the fact that similarly situated co-accused
persons have already been granted bail, the above named petitioner is
directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs10,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72315 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with S.T. No. 780 of 2025
arising out of Bhagalpur G.R.P.S Case No. 79 of 2025, subject to
conditions that
(I) One of the bailors will be a close relative/family
members of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner will remain present on each and every
date fixed by the learned Court below, if so required by the learned
Trial Court and on non-appearance of the petitioner on two
consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, the learned Trial Court
would be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.