Dipak Singh @ Deepak Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15975 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2024 Thana- KAJRA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Dipak Singh @ Deepak Singh Son of Vasistha Narayan Singh @ Radhe Singh R/o - Pokhram, P.S - Kajra, District - Lakhisarai, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pushpendra Priyedarshi, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Shashi Saurabh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kajra P.S. Case No. 83 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that, on the alleged date and time, the son of the informant went missing and the next day, his dead body was found in her orchard. It is alleged that the accused persons including the petitioner have committed the murder of her son.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15975 of 2025(4) dt.11-07-2025 2/3 present case merely on the basis of suspicion. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused recorded before the police which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. The petitioner is a lunatic (mad) person. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that there is previous dispute between the parties. Learned counsel further submitted that except confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no material against this petitioner to prove his involvement in the alleged occurrence.

Learned counsel further submitted that even if taking the confessional statement of the co-accused to be true, the same is not supported by the postmortem report as the said injuries are not reflected in the same which creates doubt over the story of the prosecution. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 22.09.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that as per paragraph no. 79 & 80 of the case diary, the co-accused have confessed their guilt and specifically narrated the manner in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15975 of 2025(4) dt.11-07-2025 3/3 which he along with other accused persons including the petitioner committed murder of the deceased. The confessional statements are further corroborated by the postmortem report of the deceased and, therefore, the petitioner does not deserve to be released on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the prayer for bail of the co-accused Lalan Singh has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 7469 of 2025.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being ample material against this petitioner supported by the medical evidence as also the nature and gravity of offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T