Patna High Court

Indradeo Kumar @ Indra Dev Kumar @ Indradeo MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 12 March 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Indradeo Kumar was charged under Sections 80 and 238 of the BNS for allegedly murdering and burning the informant’s daughter over a dowry demand. The petitioner sought regular bail after a prior bail petition had been rejected. The prosecution’s case relied on four material witnesses, with the informant (PW‑4) declared hostile and testifying that the petitioner was residing in Delhi at the time of the incident. The petitioner’s counsel highlighted the lack of any incriminating evidence against him, his clean criminal record, and his custody since 18‑06‑2025. Considering the absence of substantive proof and the hostile nature of the key witness, the court granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the serious nature of the charges under Sections 80 and 238 of the BNS and a prior bail rejection.

Legislation cited

BNS — s. 238, 80

Subjects

regular bail
bail petition
Section 80
Section 238
murder
dowry demand
hostile witness
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13791 of 2026
                                              In
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60193 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2024 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Indradeo Kumar @ Indra Dev Kumar @ Indradeo Mahto S/o Baiju Mahto @
                 Baijnath Mahto Resident of Village - Patpara, P.S - Bibhutipur, District -
                 Samastipur

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-03-2026                  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 Sections 80 and 238

                   of BNS.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

                   that earlier the bail petition of this petitioner was rejected by the

                   learned Co-ordinate Bench vide Cr. Misc. No. 60193 of 2025.

                                4.    The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner along with others are alleged to have killed and burnt

                   the informant’s daughter due to non-fulfillment of dowry

                   demand of bike.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13791 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                            2/3




                       5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in

          this case altogether four material witnesses have been examined,

          only Investigating Officer (I.O.) has to be examined. It has

          further been submitted that informant is examined as PW-4 and

          he has been declared hostile by the prosecution and in cross-

          examination this witness has stated that the petitioner was living

          at Delhi prior to occurrence and he had arrived from Delhi on

          the information of the occurrence. He has further stated that the

          deceased has died due to ailment. In court question this witness

          has categorically stated that the petitioner was living outside at

          the time of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

          submitted that from the evidence of the informant it is clear that

          he has not alleged any allegation against this petitioner. Other

          witnesses have also not said anything regarding the role of this

          petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

          the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is in

          judicial custody since 18.06.2025.

                       6. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed

          the prayer of regular bail.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13791 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 605 of 2025 arising

                      out of Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 237 of 2024, G.R. No. 676 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 S.D.J.M., Rosera (Samastipur).



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…