Patna High Court
Sushil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court denied bail to the petitioner, finding sufficient grounds to keep him in custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Sushil Kumar, was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 137(2) and 140(1) of the BNS, 2023, alleged to involve dowry demand, torture and the death of his wife. He claimed a clean antecedent and argued that he was falsely implicated, asserting that the informant’s allegations were vague and that the victim had been missing for months before being declared dead. The State opposed bail, highlighting that the victim’s body had not been recovered, that the husband had not lodged an FIR, and that a confession to the crime was recorded in the investigation diary. After hearing both sides, the Court found the circumstances serious enough to deny regular bail. Consequently, the petition for bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 137(2) and 140(1) of the BNS, 2023 in view of the alleged dowry‑related murder and the recorded confession.
- Whether the presumption against the husband in a missing‑person case warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(1)
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- missing person
- presumption against husband
- confession
- Sections 137(2) BNS 2023
- Sections 140(1) BNS 2023
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12095 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2025 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai
======================================================
Sushil Kumar S/o Rameshwar Yadav @ Jiro Yadav Resident of Village-
Jagdishpur, P.S.- Balia, Distt- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Binode Bariar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 137(2) and 140(1) of the
BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 25.04.2025 and the informant alleges that his daughter
was married to the petitioner about five years back. Further, the
petitioner, for the last six months, was demanding a motorcycle
and Rs.2 lakhs but the informant was not able to fulfill the
demand, hence, the victim was tortured. Further, there was
absolutely no communication in between the informant and the
victim since 11.01.2025. Further, on 12.01.2025, the informant
went to meet the victim but she was not present in the house
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12095 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
and, on inquiry, the petitioner disclosed that she has been killed,
thus, alleges that petitioner along with accused persons killed
the victim.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that even if the petitioner had
killed the victim whether he would have disclosed the said fact
to the informant who is his father-in-law. It is next submitted
that allegation of demand of dowry and torture is general and
omnibus in nature. It is also submitted that the victim went
missing for which a Sanha was instituted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that
petitioner is the husband of the victim and the dead body of the
victim till date has not been recovered. It is further submitted
that if the victim was missing then why the petitioner did not
institute an FIR. It is next submitted that the victim went
missing within seven years of marriage and, as such,
presumption in law is also against the husband and his family
members. It is also submitted that petitioner even confessed his
guilt during the course of investigation that he had killed the
victim as has come in para 68 of the case diary.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12095 of 2026(2) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in
connection with S. Tr. No. 1192 of 2025 arising out of Balia P.S.
Case No. 15 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Additional
Sessions Judge-VIII, Begusarai/Successor Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…