Patna High Court
Jitendra SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Jitendra Sah, was arrested in connection with the alleged dowry‑related murder of his wife, who died from burn injuries after kerosene was poured on her. He is charged under several IPC sections (341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 506, 498‑A) and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, and has been in custody since October 2023. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the mother of the deceased denied any knowledge of the incident, that the investigation is complete with a charge‑sheet filed, and that there is no risk of evidence tampering. The State contended that the FIR is based on the deceased’s dying declaration, the post‑mortem confirms death by burns, and serious dowry‑related offences are alleged, making bail inappropriate. The Court, noting the specific allegation of the petitioner pouring kerosene and the satisfactory progress of trial, rejected the bail application, stating that the observations made would not affect the trial’s merits.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged dowry death and multiple serious IPC offences.
- Whether the existence of a dying declaration, completed investigation, and risk of evidence tampering justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Evidence Act, 1872 — s. 106
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 325, 326, 341, 498-A, 506
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- murder
- IPC
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- dying declaration
- evidence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2209 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-444 Year-2023 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran
======================================================
Jitendra Sah Son of Late Jawahir Sah Resident of Village- Khadda Chowk,
P.S.- Nautan, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brij Kishor Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Nautan P.S. Case No. 444 of 2023 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 341, 323, 325, 326, 307, 506,
506 and 498-A/34 of the I.P.C. and ¾ of the DP Act.
3. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and is in
custody since 15.10.2023
4. As per FIR, petitioner who is the husband of the
informant/deceased alleged to cause her burn injury leading
to her death along with his mother and sisters after pouring
kerosene oil upon her due to non-fulfillment of demand of
dowry, on 14.10.2023 at about 3:30 PM.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2209 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/4
petitioner submitted that as per FIR mother of informant was
present in the hospital and also in matrimonial home of the
informant on the date of occurrence, but while deposing
before the Court during the trial as P.W. 3 she categorically
stated that she was told nothing about the occurrence by her
deceased daughter. She also stated that she had no complain
for petitioner (son-in-law). It is submitted that in view of
aforesaid keeping this petitioner behind the bar for any
further period would not serve any purpose of justice. While
concluding the argument, it is submitted that out of 7
prosecution witnesses 3 have been examined till date, where
petitioner remains in custody for more than two years and
moreover, investigation of this case is completed, for which
charge-sheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance
of tampering with the evidence.
6. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that deceased herself is the informant of this case,
who categorically made her statement before S.I.
Shudhanshu while admitted in burn ward of GMCH, Bettiah.
Petitioner being husband on the date of occurrence alleged to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2209 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
3/4
poured kerosene oil on deceased and his two sisters hold her
hand and hair, whereas mother thrown lightened matchstick
upon her, out of which she received serious burn injury. It is
pointed out that FIR in fact is on par of the dying declaration
of the deceased. It is also pointed out that post-mortem
report mentioned cause of death as burn injuries. Arguing
further, learned APP submitted that allegations of dowry
demand, physical assault, abuse also appears available as per
FIR against petitioner and his family members and moreover
progress of trial is also satisfactory as out of 7 charge-sheeted
witnesses 3 have already examined. In this context, it is
further submitted by learned APP that petitioner prima-face
failed to explain how informant received burn injuries as
alleged in view of Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of fact as the allegation against petitioner is
specific as to pour kerosene oil upon informant/deceased, who
herself is the author of the FIR, where cause of death opined
as burn injury, where progress of trial also appears
satisfactory as mentioned aforesaid, accordingly prayer of bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2209 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
4/4
of petitioner stands rejected.
8. It is made clear that observations made, if any,
shall be of no bearing over the merit of this case during the
trial.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…