Patna High Court
Chandan SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a bond and sureties, on the ground of vague allegations and the possibility of false accusation.
Summary
Chandan Singh applied for bail after being implicated in a case of alleged poisoning of his wife, registered under IPC Section 103(1) read with Section 3(5). The prosecution alleged that Singh and co‑accused had long‑standing quarrels with the deceased and demanded a dowry of three lakh rupees, leading to her death. The petitioner contended that the FIR lacked specific allegations, that the marriage had lasted sixteen years without any dowry demand, and that he had even taken the deceased to the hospital, indicating no malicious intent. The State argued that the post‑mortem showed poisoning and that the investigation was ongoing. Considering the vague and doubtful nature of the allegations, the lapse of many years, and the possibility of false accusation, the court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and attendance requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case of alleged poisoning under IPC Section 103(1) read with Section 3(5) given the nature of the allegations.
- Whether the allegations in the FIR are specific and substantive enough to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- IPC Section 103
- dowry demand
- false accusation
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- poisoning
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24954 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2025 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Chandan Singh S/o Late Shankar Singh, R/o Village- Banpura, P.S.- Rasulpur,
District- Saran.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner is
apprehending his arrest in connection with Rasulpur P.S. Case
No. 68 of 2025, dated 13.04.2025, registered for the offence
punishable under Section 103(1) read with Section 3(5) of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, informant received a
phone call from his grand daughter about the illness of her
mother. When the informant and other persons reached the
matrimonial place of his daughter, they came to know that his
daughter was taken to hospital and when they went to the
hospital they were informed that the daughter of the informant
has died due to spread of poison. Petitioner is said to be the
husband of the deceased. The allegation against the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24954 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
2/4
and other co-accused persons is that they always used to make
quarrel with the deceased and used to assault her. Further
allegation against the petitioner and his co-accused mother is
that they had been demanding rupees three lakhs from the last
six years.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. From plain reading of the FIR it is clear that there is no
specific allegation against the petitioner. Marriage between the
petitioner and the deceased was solemnized in the year 2009 and
it is not believable that after sixteen years of marriage there
would be any demand of dowry or subsequent torture due to
non-fulfillment of this demand. At no point of time petitioner
demanded any dowry or tortured the daughter of the informant.
The allegations levelled against the petitioner are completely
false and concocted. The allegations are vague and devoid of
particulars. The informant was apprised about the prevailing
condition of his daughter and he along with his family members
reached the hospital. It is also clear from the FIR that it was the
petitioner and his family members who took the deceased to the
hospital. If there was any sinister intention to cause harm to the
informant’s daughter, they would never had taken her to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24954 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
3/4
hospital. Also, the informant was informed by the petitioner
about the serious illness of the deceased. There is no substantive
material to show any wrongful act committed by the petitioner
on the daughter of the informant. Learned counsel further
submits that the informant has filed a compromise petition
before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Chapra. Learned counsel lastly submits that
petitioner is having clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposes the submissions made on
behalf of the petitioner and submits that the reason of death of
the deceased is said to be poisoning and the post-mortem report
also shows viscera was preserved for report of the FSL.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
vague and doubtful nature of allegation in the background of
lapse of substantive years after marriage and further considering
the possibility of false accusation, let the petitioner, above-
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court
concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be
released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24954 of 2026(2) dt.24-04-2026
4/4
Judicial Magistrate-VI, Saran at Chapra, in connection with
Rasulpur P.S. Case No. 68 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other
following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the
learned trial Court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…