Patna High Court
Rajo KewatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court held that bail must be granted as there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and he possesses a clean antecedent.
Summary
Petitioner Rajo Kewat, father‑in‑law of the deceased, was in judicial custody since 9 October 2025 for alleged torture leading to death over dowry demands under Sections 80(2) and 61 of the B.N.S., 2023. He pleaded that he has a clean antecedent and that the FIR contains only a generic allegation against all accused, with no specific charge against him. The counsel highlighted that co‑accused in similar circumstances had been granted regular bail by a coordinate bench. The State opposed the bail. Considering the lack of specific allegation, the petitioner’s clean record and the precedent, the Court ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite allegations under Sections 80(2) and 61 of the B.N.S., 2023.
- Whether the absence of a specific allegation against the petitioner and his clean antecedent justify bail.
- Whether the precedent of bail granted to co‑accused in a similar case is applicable.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 61, 80(2)
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- false implication
- clean antecedent
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 80(2) B.N.S.
- Section 61 B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4026 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2025 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda
======================================================
Rajo Kewat Son of Late Sukhu Kewat Resident of Village - Dharampur, P.S. -
Chandi, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shyamal Prakash, Advocates
For the Informant : Mr. Sunil Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard Mr. Shyamal Prakash, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Sunil Prasad, learned counsel for the Informant
and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
09.10.2025, in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 306 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 14.06.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 80(2), 61 of B.N.S., 2023.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing
torture and caused death due to non-fulfillment of demand of
dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4026 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
and the petitioner has been made accused merely on the ground
that he is father-in-law of the deceased. Although the petitioner
is named in the F.I.R. but from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears
that there is no specific allegation of any assualt or overt act or
demand of dowry attributed against the petitioner rather there is
general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons
includingt the petitioner. He further submits that similarly
situated co-accused persons against whom the similar
allegations have been granted regular bail by a Coordinate
Bench of this Court vide order dated 15.11.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 65183 of 2025 and husband of the deceased who
happens to be the son of the petitioner is in judicial custody. He
further submits that the police after investigation submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 09.10.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4026 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act or demand of
dowry attributed against the petitioner and the husband of the
deceased is in judicial custody, let the petitioner, above named,
be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Hilsa, Nalanda in connection with Chandi P.S. Case
No. 306 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the 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 antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4026 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…