Shamser Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80493 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-328 Year-2024 Thana- KAUWAKOL District- Nawada ====================================================== Shamser Alam S/o- Md. Jamil @ Md. Jalim Resident of Village- Roh, P.S.- Roh, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate For the State :

Ms. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, Advocate for the petitioner and learned Ms. Renu Kumari, APP for the State. Perused the case diary. 2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kauyakol P.S. Case No. 328 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

The prosecution case arises from U.D. Case No. 5/2024 regarding the suspected suicide of three women, whose viscera reports later confirmed death due to poisoning. Upon suspicion raised by the daughter of one deceased, present case was instituted against certain suspected persons. 4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 17.05.2025. Petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80493 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/3 bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case on the basis of hypothetical opinion of supervising authority. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has transpired in this case during investigation. It is next submitted that nothing has been found against the petitioner except the material that petitioner was in telephonic connection with deceased Sabnam Khatoon. Save and except confessional statement of the petitioner, there is no material against the petitioner, and the said confessional statement has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. Charge sheet has already been submitted in this case under Section 306 of the IPC. 6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Referring to the impugned order, it is submitted that petitioner has confessed his guilt in his confessional statement that on the false pretext of marriage, petitioner took money from the deceased, Sabnam Khatoon, whereafter, the alleged occurrence took place. It is fervently submitted that the present case pertains to triple murder, hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80493 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 3/3 7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and there being ample material against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. Prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is rejected. 8.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

9.

However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the Court below, if the trial is not concluded within a period of five months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T