Patna High Court
Suresh PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, subject to conditions, finding that mere suspicion does not justify denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Suresh Paswan, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a dowry‑death case (Mahishi P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025) where he was implicated as the father‑in‑law of the deceased. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner and others demanded a dowry of Rs.5,00,000 and were involved in the victim's murder by hanging. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no involvement in the family dispute, lived separately, and possessed a clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner bore responsibility for the death. The High Court, noting that the petitioner’s name was recorded only on suspicion, granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, subject to stringent conditions, and clarified that the order’s observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner when the allegations are based solely on suspicion.
- Whether the petitioner, as father‑in‑law, can be exempted from arrest in a dowry‑death case under Sections 438 CrPC and 482 B.N.S.S.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 238, 3(5), 482(2), 80, 85
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- father-in-law liability
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23100 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2025 Thana- MAHISHI District- Saharsa
======================================================
Suresh Paswan, Son of Late Nageshwar Paswan R/O Village- Pastpar
(Pastwar), Ward No.- 01, P.S.- Mahishi, District- Sahrsa
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 21-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Mahishi P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025 registered for the offences
under Sections 80, 85, 238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the
informant has alleged that his sister was married to one Vikesh
Paswan, son of Suresh Paswan (petitioner). It has been alleged
that all the named accused persons, including the petitioner, had
been demanding a dowry of Rs.5,00,000/- and were torturing
the sister of the informant. It has been submitted that the
informant received an information that his sister has been killed
by the named accused persons by hanging. It is alleged that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23100 of 2026(3) dt.21-05-2026
2/4
when the informant reached there, the petitioner and others were
about to dispose of the body, however, the police was called and
the FIR was registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case merely
because he happens to be the father-in-law of the deceased. It
has further been stated that the petitioner was living separately
and had no concern with the internal family matters of his son
and daughter-in-law. It has next been submitted that the son of
the petitioner had solemnized a second marriage with the
deceased, who had left her first husband and had three children
from her first marriage and that was the sole reason and dispute
between the husband and the wife and the petitioner had no say
in the same. It has also been submitted that the allegations
against the petitioner are based on mere suspicion. It has lastly
been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail and has stated that the petitioner,
being the father-in-law, should not be granted liberty of
anticipatory bail, as he was also responsible for the death of his
daughter-in-law in his house.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23100 of 2026(3) dt.21-05-2026
3/4
and taking into account that the name of the petitioner has been
taken only on mere suspicion, let the petitioner above named be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Mahishi P.S. Case
No. 256 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to
the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close
relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court
concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature
of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty
to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is
found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23100 of 2026(3) dt.21-05-2026
4/4
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/ayushkr-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.