Patna High Court
RAHUL KUMAR SINGH @ RAHUL SINGHversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied bail, holding that the statutory presumption against the husband and the surrounding circumstances justified the refusal.
Summary
The petitioner, Rahul Kumar Singh, was arrested in connection with the death of his wife, who was found hanged at their home. The informant, the victim's father, alleged that the petitioner threatened the victim over land registration and that the victim committed suicide due to torture and alcoholism. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had a clean record, and promptly reported the death to police, arguing that the presumption against husbands in dowry‑death cases should not apply. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the statutory presumption and the circumstances surrounding the death. After hearing both sides, the court held that the presumption against the husband, coupled with the facts, warranted denial of bail. Consequently, the petition for regular bail was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 in view of the presumption against the husband in dowry‑death cases
- Whether the evidence shows the petitioner’s involvement or culpability in the victim’s death
- Whether the statutory presumption can be overridden by the petitioner’s claim of immediate reporting and lack of prior criminal record
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80
Subjects
- bail
- presumption against husband
- dowry death
- suicide
- Sections 80 BNS 2023
- Section 3(5) BNS 2023
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18243 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-39 Year-2026 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna
======================================================
RAHUL KUMAR SINGH @ RAHUL SINGH S/o Jiwesh Kumar Singh @
Jiwesh Singh R/o vill - Dumariya, P.S.- Dumariyaghat, Distt.- East
Champaran at Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
Sri Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
Sri Himanshu Ranjan, Advcate
Sri Manish Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the State : Sri Ram Sumiran Rai, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Sri Arun, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 1. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned Senior
Counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and Sri
Arun, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS,
2023.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits
that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in
custody since 10.01.2026. It is submitted that the informant
alleges that his daughter was married to the petitioner on
08.12.2022 and after marriage the victim was tortured. It is
further alleged that informant received a call from the petitioner
on 07.01.2026 from his mobile no. 9110930767 on his mobile
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18243 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/4
no. 9939528219 at 11:08 a.m. and said that if the land is not
registered in his name at Motihari then the victim would be
killed. It is next alleged that the victim used to tell that she has a
child and she will bear the torture for the child and will live for
the child. It is alleged that petitioner had habit of drinking also.
It is further alleged that petitioner called his son and informed
that the victim has committed suicide, accordingly, the
informant reached the place of occurrence and saw the dead
body of the victim, thus, alleges that the victim was killed and
thereafter hanged.
4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in
the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that no
doubt, the victim died within seven years of marriage and
presumption in law is against the husband and his family
members but then all deaths are not dowry deaths. It is next
submitted that petitioner is a practicing Lawyer and he is aware
of the law and the consequences which would entail if any
occurrence of the nature as alleged takes place. It is also
submitted that after marriage the victim was residing at her
matrimonial home in the village and the petitioner was
practicing at Patna and petitioner about two months back had
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18243 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/4
brought the victim to Patna. It is further submitted that on the
date of occurrence, the petitioner had gone to the Court and
returned at 05:15 p.m. when he found the house locked from
inside and his two and half years child was crying and he
somehow managed the child to open the latch and when he
entered the house he saw the dead body of his wife hanging,
thus, he immediately informed the concerned police station and
the brother of the deceased and the brother of the deceased
subsequently informed the informant who is father of the
deceased. It is next submitted that had petitioner been involved
in the occurrence in that event efforts would have been made to
conceal the evidence by disposing of the dead body but then
petitioner immediately informed the police and the brother of
the deceased which amply demonstrates his conduct.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently opposes the
prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant submits that what is not in dispute rather stands
admitted is that the victim died. It is further submitted that the
death took place within seven years of the marriage, as such,
presumption in law also is against the husband and his family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18243 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
4/4
members. It is next submitted that from the postmortem report,
it would manifest that the same records asphyxia caused by
ligature around neck as a result of hanging which amply
demonstrates that the victim committed suicide but then why
she committed suicide is also an aspect to be considered while
considering the bail application of the petitioner. It is also
submitted that petitioner might not have killed the victim but
then being the husband it was his responsibility to ensure well
being of his wife but the petitioner instead of taking care of his
wife created condition conducive for her to take the extreme
step of ending her life when she had a child also which amply
demonstrates that the victim could not bear the trauma of torture
and, thus, committed suicide.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in
connection with Shastri Nagar P.S. Case No. 39 of 2026 pending
in the Court of learned 9th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Patna/Successor Court.
8. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.