Patna High Court
Pappu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond and strict conditions, as the cause of death was not directly attributable to the alleged assault and the petitioner had a clean antecedent.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he struck the head of the informant’s father with the butt of a pistol, causing severe injury and later death. The petitioner claimed he had a clean antecedent and that the allegations were fabricated, pointing out a seven‑day delay in filing the FIR and a post‑mortem report indicating death due to septicemic shock rather than the alleged assault. The informant and the State argued that the assault led to the death and opposed bail. The Court examined the seriousness of the offences, the petitioner’s clean record, and the medical evidence suggesting the cause of death was unrelated to the alleged assault. Considering these factors, the Court granted bail on the condition of a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and compliance with several procedural conditions. The bail order was directed to the Additional Sessions Judge, Manjhaul, Begusarai, with provisions for cancellation if the petitioner absconds or tampers with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged against him
- Whether the cause of death being septicemic shock severs the causal link between the alleged assault and the death
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- homicide
- septicemic shock
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85563 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2025 Thana- Chhaudahi District- Begusarai
======================================================
Pappu Kumar Son of Laddulal Mehto R/O Village- Chhaurahi, P.S.-
Chhaurahi, District- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Thakur, Advocate
Ms. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Ajay Thakur, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the
Informant and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
15.08.2025, in connection with Chaurahi P.S. Case No. 80 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 24.07.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352,
351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and later on Section 103(1)
of the B.N.S., 2023 was added.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he hit on
the head of the informant’s father with butt of the pistol, as a
result of which he received severe head injury and later on he
died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85563 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/4
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
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
As per allegation in the F.I.R. the petitioner has assaulted the
deceased with the butt of his pistol and he has received injury
and he snatched Rs 500/- from the pocket of the deceased.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the date
of occurrence as alleged in the F.I.R. is 17.07.2025 but the
present F.I.R. was instituted on 24.07.2025 after delay of seven
days without giving any explanation of delay and the injured
person (deceased) after treatment he returned back from the
Hospital on 11.08.2025 and thereafter he died on 13.08.2025 at
his residence and inquest report was prepared at the house
which suggest that his death was done in his house and as per
cause of death is concerned, it appears from the post mortem
report that “Cause of death: In my opinion death was due to
septicemic shock as a result of above mentioned injuries caused
by heavy, hard and blunt object.” which suggests that the
deceased has not died due to injury inflicted upon the deceased
and the petitioner has confessed his guilt in his self confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85563 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/4
statement. He further submits that the police after investigation
submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is
in custody since 15.08.2025.
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 the petitioner has assaulted to the deceased and
due to this reason, the deceased has died.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean
antecedent and the cause of death is due to septicemic shock, let
the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Manjhaul, Begusarai in connection
with Chaurahi P.S. Case No. 80 of 2025, subject to the
following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85563 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
4/4
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…