Dismissed¶21

Pappu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC5 Aug 2025CR. MISC./10627/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court bail rejection, 05-08-2025, Chandra Prakash Singh, J.; Cr. Misc. No. 10627 of 2025; petitioner Pappu Kumar; Bariyarpur P.S. Case No. 77 of 2024, District Munger; IPC Sections 363, 364, 302, 201; kidnapping/abduction and murder; deceased Chhotu Kumar last seen alive with petitioner; body thrown into Ganga river; confessional statement of co-accused Prince Kumar, case diary para 24; co-accused bail order in Cr. Misc. No. 89166 of 2024 dated 22.04.2025; custody since 27.08.2024; bail denied on heinous nature of allegations; trial expedition directed.

What did the court decide?

No relief to the petitioner; bail application rejected. Trial court directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest. ¶21

Pappu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10627 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2024 Thana- BARIYARPUR District- Munger

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Pappu Kumar S/o Karelal Mandal R/o vill - Pairu mandal tola, Ps- Bariyarpur, District- Munger

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Deep Anshuman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin For the Informant : Mr. Surya Narayan Sah ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 05-08-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bariyarpur P.S. Case No. 77 of 2024 dated 17.10.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 364 of the I.P.C. Later on, Sections 302 and 201 of the I.P.C. were also added.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, on 06.04.2024 at about 8.00 P.M., the brother of the informant, namely, Chhotu Kumar was conversing with Ruby Devi in his field situated in Diyara for plucking Parwal Vegetable . In the meantime, the co-accused Prince Kumar, Mithun Kumar, Dilkhush Kumar and Pappu Kumar (petitioner) assaulted Chhotu Kumar with lathi and

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10627 of 2025(3) dt.05-08-2025 2/3

¶16

danda and while assaulting took him towards the Ganga river. After some times, Ruby Devi informed the informant that the aforesaid accused persons took Chhotu Kumar towards the Ganga river by assaulting him with lathi-danda. The informant alongwith his family members searched for Chhotu Kumar but he was not found. The informant came to know by villagers during night of incident that Gulshan Kumar had also assaulted Chhotu Kumar alongwith other accused persons. The informant suspected that all the accused persons disappeared Chhotu Kumar with an intention to kill him.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The informant is not the eyewitness to the alleged occurrence. The informant received information from the villagers that the petitioner was also present at the time of the commission of the crime due to that his name has been implicated in this case. There is nothing against the petitioner except suspicion. It is submitted that the other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 89166 of 2024 under order dated 22.04.2025. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10627 of 2025(3) dt.05-08-2025 3/3

¶19

the bail petition. He is in custody in this case since 27.08.2024.

¶20

Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the deceased was last seen alive with the petitioner. It is further submitted that as per para 24 of the case diary, the co-accused Prince Kumar in his confessional statement, has stated that he along with the petitioner and the other co-accused persons assaulted the deceased due to which he died and thereafter, the dead body was thrown away in the Ganga river.

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the application stands rejected.

¶22

Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.

¶23

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶24

guddukr/-

¶25

U T

Pappu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tahir Miyan @ Tahir Hussain Vs The State of Bihar

Indu Devi @ Rinku Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Laljee Singh @ Lallan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Bishnu Kumar Singh @ Bishnu Kumar Mahto @ Bishnu Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Vishal Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Rajnish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar