The Supreme Court has set aside three bail orders of the Patna High Court in a case over a killing during the 2024 Lok Sabha elections in Bihar’s Saran district. It found that the High Court had not examined video footage and witness statements on record. A bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu sent the matter back for fresh hearing on October 16, 2026.
Background
The appeals were filed by Nagendra Ray, father of the deceased Chandan Ram, against the State of Bihar and another. He challenged anticipatory bail granted to Kamakhya Singh alias Deepu Singh, and regular bail granted to Ram Pratap Singh alias Ravi Kant Singh and Ramakant Solanki alias Ramakant Singh.
The prosecution alleges that on May 21, 2024, around 7 AM, a group of 40-50 armed persons surrounded the appellant’s son and others at Bhikhari Chowk. Solanki allegedly shot the appellant’s son in the chest, while Ram Pratap Singh allegedly shot Manoj Ram in the head. An FIR was registered at Town Police Station, Chhapra Nagar. A chargesheet has been filed and the trial is pending.
The sessions court had earlier refused relief to all three accused. One key reason was police-obtained video footage showing their presence at the spot. In Ram Pratap Singh’s case, it recorded that he was seen holding a rifle.
The Supreme Court noted that the High Court did not consider this footage while granting relief to Kamakhya Singh and Ram Pratap Singh. In all three orders, it also did not consider the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, who had identified the accused after being shown the video. For Ramakant Solanki, the High Court recorded the investigating officer’s submission on the footage but gave no reasoning of its own. The bench observed:
“Merely recording the submissions of the parties without any independent assessment of such submissions is not a proper approach while dealing with applications for bail. Reference to material, however concise they may be, ought to be made to show application of mind. Importantly, it is ‘the reasons’ which form the backbone of all judicial decisions.”
The Court allowed the appeals and set aside the impugned orders. It revived the three bail applications before the High Court, which will hear the accused, the complainant and the police. Until those applications are finally decided, the three accused will remain on interim bail on the conditions already imposed. The bench also clarified:
“We clarify that the observations made in this order shall not be treated as findings on the merits of the case. All contentions/objections on merits are kept open.”
