Patna High Court

AMIT KUMAR YADAV @ AMIT YADAVversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 20 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SONI SHRIVASTAVA

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs.10,000, two sureties and the condition of personal appearance before the trial court.

Summary

The petitioner, Amit Kumar Yadav, was charged under IPC sections 328, 304B and 34 for allegedly killing an informant's daughter over a dowry demand. The petition sought bail, arguing a three‑day delay in filing the FIR, lack of criminal antecedents, and that the key informant, examined during trial, did not support the prosecution and was not declared hostile. The State opposed the bail. The court noted the informant's non‑supportive testimony, the petitioner’s custody since November 2024, and the absence of prior convictions. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing a condition that the petitioner must appear in the trial court on every date and may have bail cancelled for unexplained consecutive absences. The bail order was issued by Justice Soni Shrivastava.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a dowry‑death case under IPC sections 328, 304B and 34 despite the seriousness of the charges
Whether the three‑day delay in lodging the FIR and the informant’s non‑hostile testimony justify bail
Whether the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record and willingness to cooperate affect the bail decision

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 328, 34

Subjects

bail
dowry death
IPC 304B
criminal procedure
surety
non‑hostile witness
trial attendance

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22448 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-569 Year-2021 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria
                 ======================================================
                 AMIT KUMAR YADAV @ AMIT YADAV S/O ARJUN YADAV R/o vill -
                 Madhura Dakshain, ward no. 9, P.S.- Narpatganj, Distt.- Araria



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



                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Gopal Kumar Jha, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       MrS.Pushpa Sinha.1, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   20-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                  2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the

                   petitioner in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case no.569 of

                   2021 registered under sections 328, 304B and 34 of IPC.

                                3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that petitioner along with

                   his family members killed the informant’s daughter due to non-

                   fulfillment of demand of dowry.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   there is a delay of three days in lodging of the F.I.R. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22448 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner has been implicated in the case only for the reason

          that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. Learned

          counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that trial has

          commenced and informant has already been examined who has

          not supported the case of prosecution and has also not been

          declared      hostile,    making        her   deposition   binding   upon

          prosecution. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is

          in custody since 19.11.2024. He undertakes to co-operate in

          case/trial.

                        5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

          A.P.P. for the State.

                        6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and

          circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that

          informant has not supported the prosecution case during trial,

          the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in connection

          with Narpatganj P.S. Case no.569 of 2021 on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties

          of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court

          concerned where the case is pending/successor Court, subject to

          further condition that the petitioner shall remain physically

          present in the learned trial Court on each date and shall

          cooperate in the trial. In case the petitioner is absent on the two
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22448 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026
                                                          3/3




                        consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, the learned trial

                        Court would be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the

                        petitioner.


                                                  (Soni Shrivastava, J)

Harsh/-

U         T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…