SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 4525

PATNA HIGH COURT
Rajesh Kumar Verma, J
Nitesh Kumar @ Nitish Kumar @ Durlabh – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75834 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Manoj Kumar Jha
For the Respondents: Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, APP

The court grants bail emphasizing lack of corroborative evidence and substantial previous custody period.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The court reviewed the application for bail under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of BNS, 2023, emphasizing the legal rights of the accused. Facts of the Case: The petitioner has been in custody since August 24, 2024, related to a murder alleged in FIR No. 155 of 2024, claiming the accusation is false.

Findings of Court:
The court noted insufficient evidence beyond a self-confession for holding the petitioner.

Issues: The court considered whether the evidence presented sufficed for detention.

Ratio Decidendi: The petitioner's detention lacks corroborative evidence, leading to the decision for bail in light of the substantial time served.

Result: The petitioner is granted bail upon conditions outlined herein.

Table of Content
1. insufficient evidence beyond self-confession. (Para 5)
2. conditions for bail granted by the court. (Para 6)

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

4 21-01-2026 Heard Mr.Manoj Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

24.08.2024 in connection with S.Tr.No.329/2025 corresponding to Shahkund P.S. Case No. 155 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 22.08.2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1),3(5)

of BNS , 2023.

committed murder to the son of the informant.

allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has been transpired during investigation on the basis of the self-confessional statement of the petitioner and except the aforesaid, no other cogent material has come during investigation against the petitioner to suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the present occurrence. The informant is not the eye witness of the alleged occurrence and merely on the basis of suspicion, name of the petitioner has been implicated in the present case. The police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 24.08.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has confessed his guilt in the present occurrence which is recorded in paragraph-26 of the case diary, apart from the aforesaid, petitioner carries three more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in all the cases, as mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-XIX, Bhagalpur in connection with S.Tr.No.329/2025 corresponding to Shahkund P.S. Case No. 155 of 2024, with the following conditions:-

(I) 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) 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 antecedent, 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)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top