Regular bail application for murder and Arms Act charges arising from a shooting of a woman. State relied on confessional statement alleging a contract killing. Court found allegations specific and heinous and declined bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17311 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-182 Year-2024 Thana- BAJPATTI District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Karan Kumar Son of Ramji Raut @ Pappu Resident of Village- Birpur, Ward No. 3, P.S.- Sursand, Distt.- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhubala Verma, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 06-08-2025
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 Bajpatti P.S. Case No. 182 of 2024 dated 28.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, three unknown miscreants riding on a motorcycle are alleged to have shot the informant's wife. It is further alleged that the younger son of the informant informed him that his mother was lying on the ground in an injured condition having sustained two bullet injuries, one on the left side of her stomach and the other on the left side of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17311 of 2025(4) dt.06-08-2025 2/3
her back and blood was oozing out. Thereafter, the informant's wife was taken to the hospital and during the course of treatment, she died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The petitioner has been made accused in this case merely on suspicion. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has four criminal antecedents as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 09.09.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner and the co-accused persons are involved in the murder of the informant's wife. Learned counsel has further submitted that as per para 86 of the case diary, there is confessional statement of the petitioner where he confessed his guilt and admitted that one Avinash Yadav had given the contract to kill the woman which belonged to the Bind caste and for this purpose, he promised a payment of Rs. 1,00,000/-. On 21.08.2024, the petitioner, his friend, Anil Kumar and Avinash Yadav riding on motorcycle went to the Rasalpur village to kill the deceased. Avinash Yadav
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17311 of 2025(4) dt.06-08-2025 3/3
had given the pistol to the petitioner and as per plan, they reached the place of occurrence and shot the women dead. The pistol used in the incident is kept in the possession of Avinash Yadav. The petitioner has also alleged that in the said act, he received Rs. 10,000/- and his friend received Rs. 15,000/-. As per the post-mortem report of the deceased, the cause of death was due to haemorrhagic shock caused by firearm.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the specific and heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above-named on bail.
7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
8. The application stands rejected.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)
Gautam/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, implicated on confession evidence in a contract-killing murder despite not being named in the FIR, should be enlarged on regular bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Karan Kumar
The State of Bihar
Chandra Prakash Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
