Patna High Court
Amit Kumar @ Gurudeo Kumar @ Gurudev KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted as the petitioners have clean antecedents and no cogent material links them to the offences, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, including Punita Devi, Amit Kumar and Rajesh Yadav, were charged under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS for the alleged murder of Jaswant Kumar, based on an FIR filed by the victim's mother, Urmila Devi. The prosecution alleged that the accused conspired, threatened, and ultimately killed the victim, while the defence argued that the informant was not an eye‑witness, no material evidence beyond suspicion existed, and the accused have clean antecedents. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court noted the lack of substantive proof and the petitioners' clean records. Consequently, the court ordered bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was directed to be implemented by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Madhepura.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS in the absence of substantive evidence.
- Whether the informant's statements constitute sufficient basis for continued detention.
- What conditions may be imposed on bail in such serious offences.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- clean antecedent
- suspicion
- charge‑sheet
- murder
- criminal conspiracy
- BNS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9950 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Punita Devi Wife of Late Yashwant Yadav @ Jashi Yadav R/o - Village -
Khari South, Ward No - 15, P.S - Murliganj, District-Madhepura.
2. Rajesh Yadav Son of Kulo Yadav R/o - Village - Belodih, Ward No. - 03, P.S
- Murliganj, District - Madhepura.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 14770 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Amit Kumar @ Gurudeo Kumar @ Gurudev Kumar Son of Sajan Yadav @
Sajjan Yadav @ Sajjan Kumar R/o Village - Khari South Ward No. 15, P.S. -
Murliganj, District. - Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 9950 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kumar Dhirendra Pratap Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, A.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 14770 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 02-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioners seek bail in connection with Murliganj
P.S. Case No. 409 of 2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9950 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
2/5
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the
informant, Urmila Devi, alleging inter alia that a case between
the informant's son, Jaswant Kumar @ Jasi Yadav and her
daughter-in-law, Punita Devi, has been pending before the court
at Madhepura for about three years. During this period, Punita
Devi developed illicit relations with co-accused Amit Kumar @
Gurudev Kumar and Rajesh Yadav, which was opposed by the
informant's son. During this time, the informant's daughter-in-
law had married her minor daughter to the accused Amit Kumar
about a year ago, which was also opposed by the informant's
son. Meanwhile, Punita Devi had been pressuring the
informant's son to register one bigha of land in favour of Amit
Kumar @ Gurudev Kumar, which he refused. Upon such
refusal, the accused persons extended repeated threats to kill
him. On 17.08.2025 at about 9:00 PM, Punita Devi, Amit
Kumar @ Gurudev Kumar, Shubham Kumar, Anshu Kumar,
Rajesh Yadav called the informant's son out of his house on the
pretext of loading fertilizer and took him to village Bellodih
near a canal, where they brutally murdered him by slitting his
throat with a sharp-edged weapon and threw the dead body in a
nearby paddy field. On 18.08.2025 at about 6:00 AM, upon
hearing hue and cry raised by villagers and after photographs
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9950 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
3/5
and videos of her son went viral on mobile phones, the
informant reached the place of occurrence along with villagers
and found her son lying dead in a paddy field with his throat slit
by a sharp-edged weapon. The informant further alleges that all
the named accused persons, in furtherance of a criminal
conspiracy, murdered her son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioners have not
committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. From perusal of
the F.I.R it appears that petitioners have been made accused in
these cases on the basis of suspicion and except suspicion, no
other cogent material has come during the course of
investigation to suggest the involvement of petitioners in the
present cases. It is further submitted that informant is not an
eye-witness to the occurrence in question and even no one has
seen the occurrence. It is next submitted that the police after
investigation has submitted charge-sheet and the petitioners of
Cr. Misc. No. 9950 of 2026 are in custody since 19.08.2025 and
the petitioner of Cr. Misc. No. 14770 of 2026 is in custody since
10.09.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9950 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
4/5
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and no
other cogent material has come during the course of
investigation to suggest the involvement of petitioners in the
present cases, let the petitioners, above named, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned CJM, Madhepura in connection with Murliganj
P.S. Case No. 409 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9950 of 2026(3) dt.02-04-2026
5/5
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…