Patna High Court
Sandesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that the confessional statement has no evidentiary value and, in view of the delay and lack of other material, bail must be granted.
Summary
The petitioner, Sandesh Kumar, applied for bail in a murder case registered under Section 137(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, where the FIR was lodged two days after the alleged incident and named unknown persons. During investigation, the petitioner was allegedly subjected to custodial torture and forced to give a confessional statement implicating himself, which the petitioner contended has no evidentiary value. The prosecution opposed bail, relying on the allegations and medical evidence, while the petitioner argued the confession was inadmissible and that the towel evidence was independently recovered. The court noted the delay in filing the FIR, the lack of material against the petitioner apart from the coerced confession, and held that the confession could not be used as evidence. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions of family surety and regular appearance in the trial court.
Issues considered
- What is the evidentiary value of a confessional statement obtained under alleged custodial torture?
- Does the delay in lodging the FIR and the fact that it names unknown persons affect the grant of bail?
- Should bail be granted under Section 137(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 in the absence of substantive evidence beyond the confession?
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 137(2)
Subjects
- bail
- confessional statement
- custodial torture
- delay in FIR
- evidentiary value
- Section 137(2) BNS 2023
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73119 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2025 Thana- VISHAMBHARPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Sandesh Kumar Son of Baldev Singh @ Valdev Singh Resident of Village -
Sallehpur, Police Station - Vishambharpur, District – Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kr. Sinha, Adv.
Mr.Thakur Brajesh Singh, Adv.
Mr. Tooba Heera, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Vishambharpur P.S. Case no.96 of
2025 registered under section 137(2) of BNS, 2023.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that on 02.05.2025 the
informant’s husband left home but did not return and
subsequently, his dead body was recovered in a sugar cane field.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
FIR was lodged after a delay of two days and the same was
lodged against unknown persons. Subsequently, during course
of investigation, the petitioner was subjected to custodial torture
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73119 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
and was forced to give confessional statement showing his
complicity and also showing the use of towel for the murder
which was subsequently shown to be recovered from the place
of occurrence. It has further been submitted that such
confessional statement taken by the police has no evidentiary
value in the eye of law. So far as recovery on the basis of
confessional statement is concerned, the inquest report of the
deceased has been brought on record to the notice of this Court
which was prepared on 04.05.2025 and the same indicates that a
towel was already found besides the dead body. As such, the
present case is not one of confessional statement leading to
recovery. It has further been submitted that petitioner is a young
boy and he is in custody since 19.05.2025. He undertakes to
cooperate in the case/trial and charge-sheet has been submitted
in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State on the ground that there are allegations
against the petitioner and the oral evidence stands corroborated
by the medical evidence.
6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case and also considering that the factum
of delay in lodging of the F.I.R that too against unknown
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73119 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
persons and there is no other material available against this
petitioner except his confession before police which has no
evidentiary value in the eye of law, the petitioner is directed to
be enlarged on bail in connection with Vishambharpur P.S. Case
no.96 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court concerned where the case is
pending/successor Court on the following conditions:-
(I) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be the
family member/close relative of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
the learned trial Court on each date and shall cooperate in the
trial. In case the petitioner is absent on the 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)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…