Patna High Court
Mukesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted as the petitioner’s confessional statement and the material on record indicated his involvement in the offence.
Summary
Mukesh Yadav applied for bail in a murder case involving the killing of a teacher, alleged under Sections 103, 3(5) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing he was never named in the FIR, that only suspicion existed, and that the CDR report did not link him to other accused. The State opposed bail, citing a confessional statement by the petitioner that he was one of the shooters, recorded in the case diary. The court examined the submissions and the material on record, finding the confessional statement sufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected, though the petitioner may renew the prayer if the trial exceeds six months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the existence of a confessional statement implicating him.
- Whether mere suspicion and lack of FIR naming constitute grounds for bail.
- Whether the confessional statement recorded in the case diary is sufficient to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- confessional statement
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77022 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2025 Thana- KUSHESHWARASTHAN District-
Darbhanga
======================================================
Mukesh Yadav S/o Late Bindeshwari Yadav @ Birju Yadav R/o Village-
Tilathi, P.S.- Kanoriya, Dist.- Saharsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Pushpendra kumar singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State as also learned counsel for the informant.
Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Kusheshwar Asthan P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Section 103, 3(5) & 61(2) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The informant’s elder brother, a teacher at Utkramit
High School, was shot dead after leaving for school. The
deceased had ongoing disputes with Headmaster Ram Chandra
Paswan, including a recent altercation over indecent remarks
towards a female teacher, and had expressed fear of being killed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77022 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
2/3
The informant suspects the Headmaster along with adversaries
Ganga Prasad Yadav, Shivdhari, and Pappu Yadav, of
conspiring in the crime.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged
against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has
surfaced in this case during investigation. Learned counsel for
the petitioner submits that except suspicion, there is no material
against the petitioner. It is submitted that even the CDR report
also does not confirm about the connectivity of one accused to
another accused. Petitioner was not even put on T.I. Parade to
ascertain his complicity in the alleged occurrence. Petitioner is
languishing in custody since 06.02.2025, passed in three
criminal antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
It is submitted that petitioner in his confessional statement has
confessed his guilt and has very categorically stated the manner
in which alleged occurrence took place, wherein petitioner is
one of the shooters, which fact finds figure in paragraph No.
127 of the case diary.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77022 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
3/3
6. Considering the rival submissions made by the
learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the
material available on record, this Court is not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail is hereby rejected.
7. However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail in the Court below, if the trial is not concluded
within a period of six months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…