Patna High Court
Jay Kishun BhagatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 3, denied it to petitioner no. 2, and permitted withdrawal of the application for petitioner no. 1.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers from Muzaffarpur, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNSS) fearing arrest in a case registered under Section 103(1) BNSS relating to alleged dowry‑related torture and murder. They contended that the informant’s allegations were vague, that the real accused was a man named Vijay, and that they had clean antecedents, especially the 77‑year‑old petitioner no. 3. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the FIR suggested probable involvement of the petitioners in the crime, including the handling of the dead body. The court allowed the petitioners to withdraw the anticipatory bail application for petitioner no. 1, who had already been arrested, and granted anticipatory bail to petitioner no. 3 subject to bail bonds and sureties, while refusing bail to petitioner no. 2. The anticipatory bail application was thus disposed with a partial grant.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the BNSS in a case under Section 103(1) BNSS.
- Whether the petitioners can withdraw their anticipatory bail application after arrest.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 103
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- dowry dispute
- false implication
- bail conditions
- withdrawal of bail application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24754 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- Jaitpur District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. Jay Kishun Bhagat son of Sukdeo Bhagat @ Sukhdeo Bhagat Resident of
village- Muza (Muza patrhiyan), Ps- Jaitpur, Dist- Muzaffarpur
2. Hari Kishun Bhagat Son of Sukdeo Bhagat @ Sukhdeo Bhagat Resident of
village- Muza (Muza patrhiyan), Ps- Jaitpur, Dist- Muzaffarpur
3. Sukdeo Bhagat @ sukhdeo Bhagat Son of Late sukrit Bhagat Resident of
village- Muza (Muza patrhiyan), Ps- Jaitpur, Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Upendra Kumar Chaubey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission
to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with respect to
petitioner no. 1 (Jay Kishun Bhagat), who was arrested during
pendency of the instant anticipatory bail application.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24754 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
2/5
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that his daughter in the Year 2009 was married to Vijay,
after marriage Vijay was demanding a bike and on account of
non-fulfillment of demand, the victim was tortured and
assaulted, further the family members of Vijay were threatening
to kill the victim, next alleges that Vijay was having extramarital
relation with a woman which can be culled from the
investigation of his mobile, it is further alleged that on 30-10-
2025 a villager called his son on his mobile and informed that
victim has been killed and the dead body is being taken for
cremation, accordingly his son reached the place of occurrence,
but no one was found present in the house, after search the dead
body was located and the accused were taking the dead for
cremation, accordingly the police was informed and the police
came and took the dead body in possession and sen the same for
postmortem.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the
daughter of the informant was married to Vijay in the year 2009
and the instant FIR came to be instituted in the Year 2025. It is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24754 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
3/5
further submitted that in between 2009 to 2025 no case ever
came to be instituted either by the victim or the informant
alleging petitioners are torturing the victim for non-fulfillment
of dowry demand. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that thrust of
allegation is against Vijay. It is further submitted that informant
is not an eyewitness to the occurrence and the allegation of
demand of dowry and torture is general and omnibus in nature.
It is submitted that whenever any dispute arises in between the
husband and the wife and the occurrence of the nature as alleged
takes place, the entire family members are implicated in a
mechanical manner with general and omnibus allegation. It is
also submitted that informant does not allege that his son saw
the petitioner no. 3 also accompanying the dead body.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that no doubt it is
difficult to countenance the submission made by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners but then it is submitted
that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it
would manifest that informant alleges that when his son reached
the place of occurrence, no one was found present in the house
and the dead body was missing and on search the dead body was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24754 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
4/5
located as the accused persons were taking the dead body for
cremating, but then police was informed and the dead body was
sent for postmortem. It is thus submitted that it does not appear
probable that husband all alone could have taken the dead body
for cremation. It is next submitted that the order impugned also
records that the dead body had ante-mortem injuries which
gives an impression that prior to death, the victim was assaulted.
8. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner no. 3 is an old
person aged about 77 years and has remained a person with
clean antecedent and when he is nearing his grave, he came to
be implicated based on suspicion.
9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the petitioner no. 3 above-named, in the event of his arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case
is pending/successor court in connection with Jaitpur P.S. Case
No. 193 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
10. However, the Court is not inclined to extend the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24754 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
5/5
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no. 2.
11. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail is disposed of.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.