Patna High Court
Santosh Kumar Sada @ Santosh SadaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, Santosh Kumar Sada and Mithilesh Sada, applied for regular bail in a murder case registered under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 140(1) and 238 of the BNS. The prosecution alleged that the informant’s son was killed by the petitioners, relying mainly on a confessional statement of a third person, Surjit Sada, which implicated the petitioners. The petitioners argued that the second petitioner was not named in the FIR and that no physical evidence was recovered from them, only from Surjit’s house. The informant opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the murder and the confessional statement. After hearing both sides, the court found the lack of direct incriminating material against the petitioners sufficient to grant regular bail on condition of a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to the petitioners despite one of them being named in the FIR and implicated in a confessional statement.
- Whether the absence of direct physical evidence against the petitioners warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Statutes (BNS) — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 140(1), 238
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- confessional statement
- FIR
- Bihar Penal Code
- sections 126 127 115 109 140 238
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7651 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-277 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Santosh Kumar Sada @ Santosh Sada Son of Late Jamadar Sada Resident of
Village - Koriyapatti, Ward No. 04, Police Station - Raghopur, District -
Supaul.
2. Mithilesh Sada Son of Sahdev Sada Resident of Village - Koriyapatti, Ward
No. 04, Police Station - Raghopur, District - Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Kumar Saurav, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP
for the State and learned counsel for the Informant.
2. The petitioners have prayed for regular bail in a
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections
126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 140(1) and 238 of the BNS.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the son
of the informant has gone on his bike. In night when he was
contacted, he disclosed that he was at Simrahi and he was going
to his grandmother’s house and will return in morning after
performing prayers at Dharhar Mandir. On 14.07.2025, the
mobile of the informant’s son (deceased) was switched off.
After that the informant inquired from his relatives then he came
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7651 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/3
to know that FIR named persons have killed his son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner no.2 is not named in the FIR whereas petitioner no.1
is named in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioners has
submitted that from perusal of the order of the learned trial court
it will transpire that the name of these petitioners have surfaced
in the confessional statement of Surjit Sada @ Hanthkatta and
has confessed his guilt. After this, a beheaded body was
recovered from the banks of Tilawe river. Learned counsel for
the petitioners has further submitted that save and except the
confessional statement of Surjit Sada @ Hanthkatta, there is
nothing against the petitioners. It has further been submitted that
from the house of Surjit Sada one iron pipe, two empty
cartridges and one khanti were recovered. Learned counsel for
the petitioners has further submitted that no incriminating
material has been recovered even from the possession of Surjit
and not from these petitioners.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant is present and he
has vehemently opposed the bail application of the petitioners
and has stated that Surjit has given his confessional statement
and has described the role of these petitioners as well and that it
is a case of brutal murder.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7651 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
3/3
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named
petitioners are directed to be released on bail in connection with
Raghopur P.S. Case No. 277 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Birpur (Supaul).
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…