Patna High Court
Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted and dismissed the petitioner's application.
Summary
Santosh Kumar, the petitioner, sought regular bail in a murder case (PS Case No. 369 of 2024) where he was alleged to have conspired with co‑accused Kanhaiya Poddar to kill the deceased. The prosecution presented the co‑accused’s self‑inculpatory statement, the petitioner’s confessional statement, and call‑detail records showing constant contact between them on the date of the crime. The petitioner had been in custody since August 2024 and the trial had already commenced with charges framed. The High Court, recalling its earlier order rejecting bail, found no ground to revisit that decision given the seriousness of the offence and the evidentiary material. Consequently, the application for regular bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Sections 140(3), 103(i), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the murder charges.
- Whether the earlier bail denial can be reviewed in the second application.
- Whether the confessional statement and CDR evidence preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(i), 140(3), 3(5), 61(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103(i), 238, 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- confessional statement
- call detail records
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal procedure
- charges framed
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80349 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2024 Thana- PATNA CITY CHOWK District- Patna
======================================================
Santosh Kumar S/o- Kashok Ram @ Ashok Ram R/v- Lohara Ps- Harnaut
Dist- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satya Prakash
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. The
petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chowk P.S. Case No.
369 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 140(3) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Later on Section 103(i),
61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 02.05.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 25086 of 2025 which
reads as follows:-
Heard the learned counsel for
the petitioner and learned APP for the State;
Sri Shyam Kumar Singh.
2. The petitioner, who is in custody
since 06.08.2024, seeks regular bail in
connection with Chowk P.S. Case No. 369 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80349 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
2024 registered for the offence under
Sections 103(i), 61(2), 238 & 3(5) of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The deceased was killed by
unknown criminals and his dead body was
found in a field. During the investigation, the
police found one Kanhaiya Poddar co-
accused travelling with the deceased in a
toto vehicle and subsequently, during the
investigation, it has come that Kanhaiya
Poddar was driving the toto belonging to the
deceased which he had taken on rent.
Subsequently there was a dispute between
them and Kanhaiya Poddar decided to
eliminate the deceased. Thereafter he
conspired with the present petitioner who is
the brother-in-law of co-accused Kanhaiya
Poddar. Co-accused Kanhaiya Poddar took
the deceased along with him to get a
passenger. The petitioner came to the spot on
a motorcycle where the crime was
committed thereafter, the deceased was
strangulated and stabbed by the co-accused
Kanhaiya Poddar and the petitioner.
4. Apart from the self-inculpatory
statement of the co-accused Kanhaiya
Poddar, the petitioner has also given a
confessional statement. The presence of the
petitioner at the place of occurrence has
come up in the analysis of the CDR. The
petitioner was in constant touch with co-
accused Kanhaiya Poddar on the date on
which the crime was committed and around
the time when the crime was committed.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts
and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this application for
regular bail is hereby rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80349 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
4. The trial has started and the charges have been
framed. This Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.
Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…