Patna High Court
Shamser AlamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner as the court found sufficient material against him.
Summary
The petitioner, Shamser Alam, was arrested in connection with a triple murder case involving poisoning of three women, charged under Sections 302, 34 and 306 of the Indian Penal Code. He contended that he has no criminal antecedents, was not named in the FIR, and that the only material against him is a telephonic link and a confessional statement which he claims lacks evidentiary value. The State argued that the confessional statement implicates him and that the seriousness of the offence precludes bail. The High Court examined the material on record, found sufficient evidence to justify continued detention, and consequently rejected the bail application. The Court directed the trial court to expedite the trial and allowed the petitioner to file a fresh bail petition if the trial is not concluded within five months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused in a triple murder case under Sections 302, 34 and 306 of the IPC.
- Whether a confessional statement made by the accused has evidentiary value for the purpose of bail.
- Whether the material on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 306, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- confessional statement
- triple murder
- suicide
- trial expedite
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80493 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-328 Year-2024 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada
======================================================
Shamser Alam S/o- Md. Jamil @ Md. Jalim Resident of Village- Roh, P.S.-
Roh, District- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate assisted by
Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner and learned
Ms. Renu Kumari, APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Kauyakol P.S. Case No. 328 of 2024 instituted for the offence
under Sections 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case arises from U.D. Case No.
5/2024 regarding the suspected suicide of three women, whose
viscera reports later confirmed death due to poisoning. Upon
suspicion raised by the daughter of one deceased, present case
was instituted against certain suspected persons.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that the petitioner is in custody since 17.05.2025. Petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80493 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in
paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s
counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present
case on the basis of hypothetical opinion of supervising
authority. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the
petitioner has transpired in this case during investigation. It is
next submitted that nothing has been found against the
petitioner except the material that petitioner was in telephonic
connection with deceased Sabnam Khatoon. Save and except
confessional statement of the petitioner, there is no material
against the petitioner, and the said confessional statement has no
evidentiary value in the eye of law. Charge sheet has already
been submitted in this case under Section 306 of the IPC.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Referring
to the impugned order, it is submitted that petitioner has
confessed his guilt in his confessional statement that on the false
pretext of marriage, petitioner took money from the deceased,
Sabnam Khatoon, whereafter, the alleged occurrence took place.
It is fervently submitted that the present case pertains to triple
murder, hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80493 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and there being ample material against the petitioner,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this
stage. Prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is rejected.
8. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as
expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and
unnecessary adjournments.
9. 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 five months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…