Patna High Court
Rahul KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The bail application was denied as the court found a direct and specific allegation against the petitioner supported by confessional statements and recovered arms.
Summary
Rahul Kumar was arrested in connection with a murder case (PS Makhdumpur Case No. 283 of 2025) where the informant's son was shot and later died. The prosecution relied primarily on the confessional statements of co‑accused Dablu Kumar, who alleged that Rahul fired at the victim, and on Rahul's own recorded confession, along with recovered arms allegedly purchased by Rahul. Rahul's counsel argued that he has no prior record, was not named in the FIR, and that no material evidence other than the confessions links him to the crime, seeking bail. The State contended that the confessions and recovered weapon provide a direct and specific allegation justifying continued detention. The court held that the presence of direct allegations and confessional evidence warranted denial of bail, and consequently refused the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a murder case when the prosecution's case rests on confessional statements of a co‑accused and the accused's own recorded confession.
- Whether the evidence presented establishes a prima facie case sufficient to justify denial of bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b) a, 26, 27, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(i), 3(5), 61(2), 61(a)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- confessional statement
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- evidence
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82335 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2025 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Rahul Kumar S/o Satish Singh R/o Village- Bhaur Bigha, P.S- Parasbigha,
Dist- Jehanabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Prasad, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Gyanendra Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 31-01-2026 Heard Mr. Shivendra Prasad, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Gyanendra Kumar, learned counsel for the
Informant and Mr. Nagendra Prasad, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
31.05.2025, in connection with Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 283
of 2025, F.I.R. dated 26.04.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(i) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act but the
police submitted chargesheet under Sections 103(i), 61(2), (a)
and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections
25(1-b) a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
25.04.2025 at about 7:15 P.M., the informant’s son Bablu
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82335 of 2025(3) dt.31-01-2026
2/4
Kumar along with his friend Rohit Kumar was going to
Makhdumpur by cycle and as soon as they reached near chhota
pool, situated in Dhankaul, two unknown miscreants boarded on
motorcycle fired upon the son of the informant which hit in his
back side of head thereafter they fled away. It is further alleged
that with the help of police the informant’s son was brought to
Makhdumpur Hospital from where he was referred to PMCH,
Patna for better treatment where the son of the informant was
declared dead.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and the name of the
petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis
of confessional statement of co-accused person, namely, Dablu
Kumar. Thereafter, the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the
present occurrence which was recorded in paragraph-62 of the
case diary and except the confessional statement of co-accused
Dablu Kumar and self confessional statement of the petitioner,
no other cogent material has come during investigation to
suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present
occurrence. He further submits that the police after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82335 of 2025(3) dt.31-01-2026
3/4
investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and
the petitioner is in custody since 31.05.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the other
hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
and submits that co-accused person, namely, Dablu Kumar has
confessed his guilt and he has given detailed modus operandi as
to how the occurrence of murder was committed with the
connivance of other co-accused person including the petitioner
and he has stated that the petitioner has fired upon the victim
and the same was supported by the medical evidence and apart
from aforesaid on the basis of confessional statement of co-
accused Dablu Kumar, the arms which was used in the present
occurrence in question which was recorded in paragraph-58 of
the case diary has been recovered and it has also come during
investigation that the petitioner has purchased the arms in
question which was used in the present crime in question after
paying Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) and the said
Dablu Kumar who has clearly stated in his statement that the
petitioner has fired upon the victim and thereafter the petitioner
has also confessed his guilt which was recorded in paragraph-62
of the case diary.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82335 of 2025(3) dt.31-01-2026
4/4
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that there is direct
and specific allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined
to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Makhdumpur
P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jehanabad.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…