Patna High Court
Raj Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted at this stage and dismissed the bail petition, allowing a fresh application only if the trial exceeds six months.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kumar Sah, was charged under IPC Sections 302, 304‑B, 498‑A, 120‑B read with Section 34 for allegedly torturing and causing the death of his wife over a dowry demand. He sought regular bail, claiming innocence and that the dowry allegation was false, arising after the birth of two children. The petitioner's counsel highlighted a confessional statement noting that the petitioner had received a nude video of his wife, which led to marital discord. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences. The High Court disposed of the bail petition, refusing bail and directing that if the trial is not concluded within six months, the petitioner may renew his bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite being charged with murder, dowry death, and criminal conspiracy.
- Whether the alleged dowry demand constitutes a false case that justifies bail.
- Whether the confessional statement and surrounding circumstances affect the bail decision.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120-B, 302, 304-B, 34, 498-A
Subjects
- regular bail
- dowry death
- IPC
- murder
- criminal conspiracy
- confessional statement
- bail refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48751 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2024 Thana- ADAPUR District- East Champaran
======================================================
Raj Kumar Sah S/O Sohan Sah R/O Village- Sheikwa Tola,PO and P.S-
Adapur, Distt-East Champaran at Motihari-845401
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Krishna Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.J.N. Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 13-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well
as the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail in connection
with Adapur P.S. Case No. 155 of 2024, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 304-B, 498-A, 120-B
r/w Sections 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the accused persons
including the petitioner is of torturing and causing death of the
victim, due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in
this case. The allegation of demand of dowry is prima facie, a
false case. The allegation of demand has been levelled after the
birth of two children. The learned counsel for the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48751 of 2025(6) dt.13-01-2026
2/2
drew my attention to paragraph no. 16 of the case diary, which
contains the confessional statement of the petitioner. He stated
that from the wedlock with his wife, he has a son, Ankush
Kumar, aged five years and a daughter, Riya Kumari, aged two
years. He received a nude video clip of his wife on his mobile
phone and when he inquired about that clip from his wife, she
begged pardon. However, when a similar videograph again
appeared on his mobile phone. He is in custody since
09.05.2024.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has
opposed the prayer for bail.
6. The bail petition is disposed of with the observation
that if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months,
the petitioner shall renew his prayer for bail.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
Nirmal/-
U T
Checking your session…