Patna High Court
Daya Nath MishraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court held that, given the initial accidental account and lack of forensic evidence of kerosene, bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482 of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Daya Nath Mishra and his wife Veena Devi, were accused in a complaint alleging that they set fire to their daughter‑in‑law, resulting in her death. The FIR originally recorded the incident as an accident, with the victim’s first statement and an eyewitness corroborating that kerosene was not used. The victim’s father later altered the account, alleging the petitioners deliberately burned her, leading to charges under Sections 498A, 302 and 120B of the IPC. The petitioners sought bail, arguing the allegations were false, the death accidental, and that the post‑mortem showed no kerosene residue. The Additional Public Prosecutor contended the victim’s statement should be treated as a dying declaration. The Court examined the credibility of the first statement, the lack of forensic evidence of kerosene, and the procedural propriety of granting bail under Section 482 of the CrPC, and consequently ordered bail with conditions. The bail order was conditioned on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each.
Issues considered
- The first statement of the deceased should be treated as a dying declaration.
- Whether the allegations constitute a cognizable offence warranting denial of bail.
- Whether the procedural provisions of Section 482 of the CrPC justify granting bail in this case.
- The relevance of forensic findings (absence of kerosene) to the charge of murder.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 307, 326, 34, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- dying declaration
- accidental death
- forensic evidence
- IPC
- CrPC
- Section 482
- dowry death
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29988 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1076 Year-2019 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE
District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Daya Nath Mishra Son of Late Kamla Kant Mishra Resident of village -
Mathurapur, P.S.- Warisnagar (Mathurapur O.P.), District – Samastipur.
2. Veena Devi Wife of Dayanath Mishra Resident of village - Mathurapur, P.S.-
Warisnagar (Mathurapur O.P.), District – Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Divanath Thakur Son of Late Hansnath Thakur Resident of village -
Manirampur, Near Mahatma Shiv Kumar Enter College, Dharaimaphi, P.S.-
Munshiganj, District - Amethi (U.P.).
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Khushi Awadh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Suresh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of the State.
2. The accused/petitioners apprehending their arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 1076 of 2019 arising out of
Warisnagar Mathurapur O.P. P.S. Case No. 161 of 2014
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 326,
307, 302, 120B/34 of IPC but process has been issued under
Sections 498A, 120B, 302 of IPC.
3. As per FIR, both petitioners, being father-in-law
alongwith their family members/son put informant on fire after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29988 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026
2/4
sprinkling kerosene oil on her. The informant died subsequently
while she was under treatment at Patna.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that the petitioners implicated falsely
with this case as an afterthought as occurrence was purely
accidental in nature. It is submitted that the informant received
burn injury while she was in her kitchen, whereafter she was
brought to Janta Hospital, Samastipur by her brother-in-law,
namely, Raj Kumar Mishra. It is submitted that the entire
occurrence was witnessed by a milk vendor, namely, Lukhiya
Devi. It is submitted that the first statement of victim supported
the occurrence as accident, which was duly recorded by A.S.I.,
Omkar Nath Pandey, Town P.S. SPR, in presence of Lukhiya
Devi. The statement was duly signed by informant/deceased also.
Subsequently, as an afterthought on very next day when the
father of the informant arrived, she took U-turn from her earlier
version and alleged petitioners and family members that they put
her on fire after sprinkling kerosene oil. It is also pointed out that
the informant was married with the son of the petitioners having
one son aged about 8 years. It is also pointed out that there is no
allegation of any demand for dowry. It is submitted that the
brother-in-law, who was made accused in this case, namely Raj
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29988 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026
3/4
Kumar Mishra remains present throughout treatment of informant
upto Patna, where she finally died.
5. Arguing further, it is submitted that after taking
note of aforesaid facts, police after investigation, submitted final
form against petitioners, whereafter the enquiry was initiated on
the basis of protest which was filed by the father of the
deceased, whereafter the learned Jurisdictional Magistrate took
cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 498A, 302
and 120B of the IPC. While arguing further, it is submitted that
the doctor while conducting postmortem could not find any trace
of kerosene oil as alleged through second statement, which is the
basis of the present implication.
6. Learned APP, duly assisted by learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant, while opposing the prayer
of bail submitted that the statement of informant be treated as
dying declaration. It is submitted that when father of the
informant came to the hospital, he disclosed the correct version
of the occurrence, however, he failed to submit qua first
statement of victim/informant stating occurrence was an
accident.
7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as the first statement of the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29988 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026
4/4
recorded in Janta Hospital in presence of the eye-witness of the
occurrence and also police, suggesting the occurrence as an
accident, accordingly, both above named petitioners who are in-
laws, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned
trial Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, is directed
to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-4th, Samastipur/concerned Court, where the case is
pending in connection with Complaint Case No. 1076 of 2019
arising out of Warisnagar Mathurapur O.P. P.S. Case No. 161 of
2014 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.