Patna High Court
Rajiv KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners Rajiv Kumar and Sunil Yadav were arrested in connection with a murder case (Chandramandih PS Case No. 205 of 2024) under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act. The FIR named Sunil Yadav, while Rajiv Kumar’s alleged involvement was derived from a co‑accused’s confessional statement recorded in the case diary. The prosecution also alleged that both petitioners admitted guilt and that medical evidence corroborated the manner of the killing. The petitioners sought bail, arguing lack of direct evidence against Rajiv Kumar and insufficient material linking them to the crime. The Court, after considering the confessional statement, admissions of guilt, and post‑mortem report, refused bail, concluding that the circumstances warranted continued custody.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act when the FIR does not name one accused but the investigation relies on a co‑accused’s confessional statement and alleged admissions of guilt.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- confessional statement
- murder
- firearm
- knife
- post‑mortem report
- FIR
- sessions court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7327 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDRAMANDI District- Jamui
======================================================
Rajiv Kumar Son of Sitaram Manjhi Resident of Village- Chinveriya, P.S.-
Laxmipur, District- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 10040 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-205 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDRAMANDI District- Jamui
======================================================
Sunil Yadav Son of Kedar Yadav R/o Village - Gadi Dhanaway, P.S. -
Chandramandih, District - Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7327 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
: Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 10040 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate
: Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 18-03-2026 Heard Mr.Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners, Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned A.P.P. for the State
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 7327 of 2026) and
Mr.Abhay Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State (In CRIMINAL
MISCELLANEOUS No. 10040 of 2026).
2. The petitioners seek bail, who are in custody since
07.08.2025 in connection with Chandramandih P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7327 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
205 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 28.10.2024 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 103(1)/238 and 3(5) of BNS Act.
3. The prosecution case as stated in the F.I.R.is that on
27.10.2024 at about 6:30 P.M. the petitioner Sunil Yadav has
called the brother of the informant Deonandan Yadav on phone.
Upon being called, the brother of the informant went alongwith
Sunil Yadav but till late night when he did not return, the
informant alongwith others have started to search his brother
Deonandan Yadav. Later on, it is alleged that Sunil Yadav in
connivance with other accused persons have killed the brother
of the informant namely Deonandan Yadav by causing injuries
with fire arm and knife and in order to conceal the evidence
have thrown the dead body of the deceased in the Tilaiya
Bahiyar.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submits that the petitioner, namely, Rajiv Kumar is not named in
the FIR, his name has been transpired during investigation on
the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused person,
namely, Rohit Rabat which was recorded in paragraph-27 of the
case diary. Petitioner, namely, Sunil Yadav is named in the FIR.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that except the
aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7327 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
investigation against the petitioners to suggest the involvement
of the petitioners in the present occurrence.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that although the petitioner, namely, Rajiv Kumar is not
named in the FIR, but his name has been transpired during
investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of co-
accused person, ,namely, Rohit Rabat which was recorded in
paragraph-27 of the case diary. Thereafter, the petitioners have
also accepted their guilt in the present occurrence and they have
accepted that petitioner, namely, Rajiv Kumar has fired upon the
victim and petitioner, namely, Sunil Yadav has cut the neck of
the victim which is supported by the medical evidence
(postmortem report).
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined
to enlarge the petitioners on bail in connection with
Chandramandih P.S. Case No. 205 of 2024 pending in the court
of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Jamui.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…