Allowed¶25

Sadhu @ Pradeep Paswan @ Manjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Apr 2026CR. MISC./4018/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted by Patna High Court (Praveen Kumar, J.) in CRL. MISC. No.4018 of 2026 arising from Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025, West Champaran; offences under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) B.N.S.; argument on inadmissibility of co-accused Rohit Kumar's custodial confessional statement under Section 23 B.S.A.; petitioners in custody since 02.10.2025, no criminal antecedent, charge-sheet filed; bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties; application allowed on 06-04-2026.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted; petitioners to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, West Champaran, Bettiah, in connection with Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025. ¶25

Sadhu @ Pradeep Paswan @ Manjeet Kumar Vs The… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail in connection with Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025 registered under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of B.N.S.

¶15

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of materials collected during investigation against the petitioners, the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, West Champaran, Bettiah, in connection with Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The bail application stands allowed.

¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Praveen Kumar, J.) allowed a regular bail application in Criminal Miscellaneous No.4018 of 2026 arising out of Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025, registered for offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of B.N.S. The prosecution case was that the informant's younger son, a bus driver, left home on 06.07.2025 after a telephonic call saying he was going to Purushottampur, did not return, and on 07.07.2025 his dead body was found near Bhawra Dhala with several knife blows on face and neck and fractured forelimbs. Counsel for the petitioners submitted there was no eye-witness, that the petitioners were implicated only on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Rohit Kumar made in police custody, contended to be inadmissible under Section 23 B.S.A., that the petitioners were in custody since 02.10.2025 with no criminal antecedent, and that the charge-sheet had been filed, a compromise petition having been filed in the court below upon wrong advice. Considering the facts and circumstances and the nature of materials collected during investigation, the Court directed the petitioners to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned, West Champaran, Bettiah.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4018 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2025 Thana- BALTHAR District- West Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Sadhu @ Pradeep Paswan @ Manjeet Kumar son of Ramji Paswan Resident of Village- Purushottampur, Ward No.12, Gauripur, Police Station -Purushottampur, District -West Champaran

¶5

Murad Alam Son of Late Bismillah Miyan Resident of VillagePurushottampur, Ward No.12, Gauripur, Police Station -Purushottampur, District -West Champaran

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratik, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 06-04-2026

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶14

APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025 dated 12.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of B.N.S.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that her younger son was a driver of Shivdani bus. When his bus caught malfunctioned, he went to his matrimonial home to meet his wife. It is alleged that on 06.07.2025 at about 07:00 P.M., her son received a telephonic call and thereafter he left the house telling his wife that he is going to Purushottampur and

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4018 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 2/3

¶18

would return by 9 O’clock, but he did not return. When his wife called him, firstly the phone came busy and thereafter the phone became switched off. It is further alleged that on 07.07.2025 in the morning at around 7 O’clock, a call was received that a dead body of her son was lying near Bhawra Dhala. Thereafter, the informant and her family members went to that place and saw the dead body. Thereafter, the dead body was taken to postmortem, by seeing the dead body it appeared that her son has been inflicted with several knife blows on face, neck and his forelimbs were also fractured.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence of murder and there are no circumstances to connect the petitioners in the alleged occurrence. It has been further submitted that the name of the petitioners have transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Rohit Kumar before police while in police custody and the same is not admissible under Section 23 B.S.A. Moreover, the petitioners are in custody since 02.10.2025 having no criminal antecedent. It has further been submitted that the charge-sheet has been filed and there is no allegation of tampering, although a compromise petition was filed in the court below upon wrong advice and the offence is

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4018 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026 3/3

¶21

not compoundable in nature. Moreover, the compromise petition was not filed at the initial stage of investigation.

¶22

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

¶23

opposed the bail petition of the petitioners.

¶24

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and nature of materials collected during the course of investigation against the petitioners, the petitioners abovenamed, are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bailbond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, West Champaran, Bettiah, in connection with Balthar P.S. Case No. 82 of 2025.

¶25

The application stands allowed.

¶26

(Praveen Kumar, J)

¶27

shivam/-

¶28

U T

Sadhu @ Pradeep Paswan @ Manjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadhu @ Pradeep Paswan @ Manjeet 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sangeeta Kumari @ Sangeeta Devi Vs The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Dept.of Home, govt. of Bihar, Main Secretariat

Uttam Kumar @ Uttam Kumar Bharti Vs The State of Bihar

Muskan Vs the State of Bihar

Pappu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Urmila Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Waquar Rajja Yunus Vs The State of Bihar