Patna High Court
Vikram KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail as the evidence does not establish a prima facie case of dowry death and the length of incarceration justifies release.
Summary
Vikram Kumar was arrested for alleged dowry death of his wife Arohi Kumari under Sections 304B and 120B IPC. The prosecution claims he killed her and fabricated a drowning story, while the petitioner contends the death was accidental during a river bath, supported by independent witnesses and his daughter. The petitioner, in custody since October 2024, sought bail, arguing lack of prima facie evidence and the prolonged incarceration. The State opposed bail, fearing tampering with evidence. The court, after considering the facts and the period of detention, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, directing compliance with the Sessions Court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a case involving alleged dowry death under Sections 304B and 120B IPC.
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case justifying denial of bail.
- Whether the period of incarceration warrants release on bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 304B
Subjects
- dowry death
- IPC 304B
- IPC 120B
- bail
- criminal procedure
- accidental drowning
- evidence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48559 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-305 Year-2023 Thana- NADI P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Vikram Kumar S/o Vinod Kumar R/O Village-Gyan Chak, PS-Didarganj,
Distt-Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
For the informant : Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
5 07-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offence punishable under Sections-304(B)/120(B) of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, on the date of alleged
occurrence, the informant’s brother-in-law informed him about
the death of informant’s sister due to drowning in river Ganges.
While lodging FIR of this case, the date and time of occurrence
has been shown as 17-098-2023 and 9.00 A.M. At that time,
neither any local person nor any member of SDRF team has
seen the deceased, Arohi Kumari drowning in the river. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48559 of 2025(5) dt.07-01-2026
2/4
persons present there near Ganga-ghat had only seen Vikram
Kumar while he was crying. As has been told by Vikram Kumar
in the FIR that he had attempted to rescue his wife (deceased)
and he was also about to dip down in river but he was rescued
by SDRF team. SDRF team did not find the body the deceased,
Arohi Kumari. It has been alleged by the informant that his
brother-in-law Vikram Kumar had killed Arohi Kumari for want
of dowry and after disposal of dead body, he has created a false
story of drowning. Vikram Kumnar and his family members had
started demanding dowry after a week of marriage and they
tortured informant’s sister Arohi Kumari for the same.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the sister of the informant along with his niece and brother-
in-law had gone to take bath in the river Ganges where in course
of taking bath, she drowned in the river. It is also alleged that
the husband of the deceased tried to rescue his wife and he was
also suffering to drowning but he was saved by the SDRF and
the deceased could not be saved.
4. It has been submitted further on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is husband of the deceased. As a
matter of fact, his wife (the deceased), the petitioner himself and
their minor daughter Aradhya went to take bath in the river
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48559 of 2025(5) dt.07-01-2026
3/4
Ganges. Accidentally, the wife was drowned and while the
petitioner attempted to rescue his wife, he too began drowning
but anyhow, he was saved by the persons assembled there
whereas his wife breathed her last. Learned counsel has
submiited further that an U.D. Case bearing U.D. Case No. 07
of 2023. has been filed and the independent witnesses who
were present at the place of occurrence stated at paragraphs-10,
11 & 12 as well as daughter of the deceased have stated in their
statement that the deceased died due to drowning. The petitioner
tried his level best to rescue her, but she could not be saved.
Further submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that
the present case has been filed by brother of the deceased for
some ulterior motive. The petitioner is in custody since 28-10-
2024.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the
informant has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the
petitioner shall not tamper with the evidence.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
specially, the period of incarceration, let the petitioner named
above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48559 of 2025(5) dt.07-01-2026
4/4
Sessions Judge-VIII, Patna City in connection with Sessions
Trial No. 1173 of 2025 arising out of Nadi P.S. Case No. 305 of
2023.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
A.K.V.//-
U T
Checking your session…