Patna High Court
Rupesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to regular bail in the present case.
Summary
The petitioner, Rupesh Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 87(5), 3(5), 103 and 238 of the B.N.S. concerning the disappearance and death of an informant's daughter. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on a confessional statement obtained in police custody, which the petitioner argued has no evidentiary value and is unsupported by any material evidence. He also highlighted the one‑month delay in filing the FIR and the absence of any eyewitness testimony linking him to the offence. The petitioner pointed out that a co‑accused, Aman Kumar, had been granted bail by a coordinate bench, invoking the principle of parity. After considering these factors, the court held that bail should be granted on the condition of a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the confessional statement obtained in custody is sufficient ground to deny bail
- Whether the one‑month delay in lodging the FIR affects the merit of the bail application
- Whether parity with a co‑accused who was granted bail warrants granting bail to the petitioner
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of involvement in the FIR and absence of incriminating material justify regular bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103, 238, 3(5), 87(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- confessional statement
- delay in FIR
- co‑accused parity
- criminal procedure
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8559 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2025 Thana- BHAGWANPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Rupesh Kumar Son of Pachu Singh @ Panchu Singh Resident of Village-
Pirapur Mathura, P.S.- Goraul, District- Vaishali (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 21-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for
grant of regular bail in connection with Bhagwanpur P.S. Case
No. 190 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 87 (5), 3 (5), 103 and 238 of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 27.05.2025, at
about 10:30 A.M. daughter of the informant went to college to
collect admit care but she did not return back and after lodging
of the F.I.R, the dead body was recovered by the police.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case. It has been submitted that petitioner is not named in
the F.I.R and on suspicion petitioner was arrested and his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8559 of 2026(3) dt.21-04-2026
2/3
confessional statement was taken by the police while in the
police custody which has got no evidentiary values in the eyes
of law. Moreover, the confessional statement has not led to any
recovery of any incriminating article and except the
confessional statement, there is no material on record to show
the complicity of the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. It
has further been submitted that the daughter of the informant
went missing on 27.05.2025, however, the complaint petition
was lodged after inordinate delay of one month i.e. on
27.06.2025 and there is no plausible explanation for the same
which makes the entire prosecution case doubtful. During
investigation, none of the witnesses have claimed to have seen
the petitioner committing the alleged offence. Charge sheet has
been submitted in this case and there is no allegation of
tampering against the petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since
20.08.2025 and although he is accused in one another case but
in that case he has been acquitted of all the charges. Co-accused
having more or less similar allegations, namely, Aman Kumar,
has been granted the privilege of bail by a co-ordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No
84056 of 2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8559 of 2026(3) dt.21-04-2026
3/3
the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Heard the parties and perused the record,
considering the facts and circumstances of the case particularly
the parity with the co-accused who has been granted privilege
of bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, let the petitioner
above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate-6th, Vaishali, Hajipur, in connection with
Bhagwanpur P.S. Case No. 190 of 2025.
7. The application stands allowed
(Praveen Kumar, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…