Patna High Court
Mohan DomversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioners, finding that the allegations were not specific enough to justify continued detention.
Summary
The petitioners, Mohan Dom and Rohit Dom, were charged in a murder case (Sections 302/34 IPC) arising from an incident where the informant's daughter was allegedly killed after a family dispute. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners, along with others, pressed the victim's neck, leading to her death. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, pointing out that the FIR contained only general allegations and no specific overt act against them, and highlighted their lack of criminal antecedents and prolonged custody since 29‑11‑2025. The State opposed the bail application, but the court, after hearing both sides, found merit in the petitioners' claim of insufficient specific evidence and decided to enlarge them on bail. Accordingly, each petitioner was ordered to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the District Additional Sessions Judge.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC when the FIR contains only general allegations and no specific overt act against them.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- IPC 34
- criminal procedure
- judicial custody
- presumption of innocence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13287 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2024 Thana- RAMNAGAR District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Mohan Dom S/O Pahwari Dom R/O Village- Sabuni Pokhara, P.S-
Ramnagar, Distt.- West Champaran.
2. Rohit Dom S/O Dinesh Dom R/O Village- Sabuni Pokhara, P.S- Ramnagar,
Distt.- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Milind Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.
Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection
with Sessions Trial No. 1361 of 2025, arising out of Ramnagar
P.S. Case No.195 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable
under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 07.05.2024,
Gautam Dom along with his wife Binaka Devi came to the
house of the informant and alleged that his son Sameer Dom has
fled away with the daughter of Gautam Dom, namely, Puja
Kumari and that they will take away Anchal Kumari until Puja
Kumari is back home. When the informant objected then the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13287 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
2/3
petitioners along with 13 persons pressed the neck of the
informant's daughter and killed her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this
case. During course of investigation in para-32, one Ruksana
Devi has stated that Gautam, Manohar and Rahul pulled the
deceased to the house of Gautam Dom where Gautam Dom
assaulted and pressed her neck due to which she died. From
perusal of the F.I.R. itself it is clear that the nature of allegation
is general and omnibus. There is no allegation of any specific
overt act against the petitioners and from perusal of the diary
also it transpires that if there is any direct allegation then that is
against Gautam. A statement has been made in para 3 of the
petition that petitioners have no criminal antecedent. Learned
counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioners are
languishing in judicial custody since 29.11.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The above named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13287 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026
3/3
petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each of them with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned District Additional Sessions Judge-III, Bagaha, West
Champaran in connection with Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 195 of
2024.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…