Patna High Court
Mohit Thakur @ Mohit SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohit Thakur, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the alleged murder of his wife, Sita Devi, who died from electrocution. The prosecution alleged that the brother‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law were responsible, and the FIR did not specifically charge the petitioner. The petitioner argued that the FIR and post‑mortem report did not implicate him and highlighted that the deceased was pregnant and had received high‑dose injections, casting doubt on the cause of death. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the murder charge. After hearing both sides, the court found insufficient grounds to keep the petitioner in custody and ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused in a murder case under Sections 302 and 34 IPC given the facts and evidence.
- Whether the FIR and post‑mortem report sufficiently implicate the petitioner to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC Section 302
- IPC Section 34
- criminal procedure
- electrocution
- post‑mortem evidence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13488 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-117 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Mohit Thakur @ Mohit Sharma S/o Shivpujan Thakur @ Shiv Pujan Sharma
R/o Village - Uchchidih, P.S - Palanwa, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 09-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner was married to one Sita Devi (deceased) two years
ago. On 10.05.2024, the informant came to know that the
deceased has died. When the informant reached the hospital he
found that his daughter has died due to electrocution.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that there is no allegation
against the petitioner rather the allegation is against the brother-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13488 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
in-law and mother-in-law. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
further submitted that in this case, the informant has deposed
before the trial court and has stated that he came to know that
his daughter has died due to electrocution. He has not alleged as
to who was responsible for electrocution. It has further been
submitted that from perusal of the post-mortem report it will
transpire that the doctor conducting autopsy of the deceased has
found following ante-mortem injuries:-
(i) Face congested and intact.
(ii) Froth coming out of nostrils.
(iii) Superficial to deep burn of size- 3” x 1”
found 4” below the left knee joint on shin of tibia.
(iv) Superficial to deep burn, more deep than
left side, involving bone found 4” below the right knee
joint on shin of tibia.
(v) Both burn injuries are at same level and
transverse in shape.
The doctor has opined that cause of death is “due to cardiac
arrest likely due to cardiac arrhythmia due to electric injuries
as mentioned above, but as mentioned in inquest, probable
caused to be tetnus toxoid vaccination, hence viscera have been
preserved for FSL Examination”.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13488 of 2026(3) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
5. From very beginning it is the case of the petitioner
that the deceased was pregnant and she was admitted in hospital
where high dose of injection was administered and from the
case of the prosecution it is clear that she has died due to
electrocution, moreover the petitioner is in judicial custody
since 20.11.2024.
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State
has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail to the petitioner.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Session Trial No. 221 of 2025, arising out of Ramgarhwa P.S.
Case No. 117 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-
XVIth, East Champran, Motihari.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…