Patna High Court
Aradhna KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The anticipatory bail petition was denied.
Summary
Aradhna Kumari sought anticipatory bail after being named in an FIR for the alleged murder of her brother-in-law, who died under suspicious circumstances following a property dispute. The prosecution alleged that Aradhna and her husband Ajit Kumar strangulated the deceased, citing sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The petitioner argued that the FIR was filed after an undue delay, that the informant was not an eyewitness, and that the deceased had committed suicide due to marital strain. The State and the informant’s counsel opposed bail, emphasizing the post‑mortem findings of multiple injuries indicating foul play. The court examined the seriousness of the accusations, the lack of corroborative witness testimony, and the direct nature of the charges. Concluding that the allegations were specific and grave, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the circumstances of the FIR
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and lack of eyewitness testimony affect the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- property dispute
- FIR delay
- post‑mortem report
- section 103
- section 61
- section 3
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65937 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-342 Year-2025 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Aradhna Kumari W/o Ajit Kumar R/o Mohalla - Panchrukhia Kuan, P.S -
Rajgir, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Akash Kumar Mishra, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and
learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1),
61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..
3. The prosecution story, as per written report, in
brief, is that informant’s husband, namely late Amarjit Kumar,
was posted in the C.R.P.F. and he came on leave. On
07.05.2025, he went to his Sasural to attend a marriage
ceremony and on the next day, the Barat departed and thereafter,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65937 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
2/4
on 09.05.2025 at about 8 AM, husband of informant returned to
his home at Rajgir. On the said night, informant’s Bhaisur,
namely Ajit Kumar and her Gotni, i.e. this petitioner, were also
at home. In the day time, for execution of a sale deed, some
dispute took place between this petitioner and husband of the
informant because this petitioner desired to get the sale deed
executed in her name. It is further alleged that on 09.05.2025,
informant’s husband also got a Challan issued in his name for
registration of the sale deed, which was to be done on the next
date i.e. on 10.05.2025 but in the intervening night of
09.05.2025, husband of the informant was strangulated to death.
Informant’s father-in-law informed her that her husband has
committed suicide. However, informant believes that her
husband has been murdered to death by co-accused Ajit Kumar
and this petitioner by strangulation.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. From bare perusal of the F.I.R. it is
apparent that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence
The present F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of one
month and there is no plausible explanation for the same. Prior
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65937 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
3/4
to lodging of the present F.I.R., a U.D. case was also registered
by father of the deceased. As a matter of fact, due to strained
relationship with his wife, the deceased committed suicide by
hanging. During course of investigation, none of the witnesses
have supported the prosecution case. Petitioner is none else than
own Gotni of the informant and she has falsely been implicated
in this case only on suspicion. Petitioner is a lady and claims
clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and
submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific
accusation that she, along with her husband, namely Ajit Kumar,
killed the deceased. Even as per the post mortem report,
multiple injuries were found on the person of the deceased
which clearly reflects that the accused persons used criminal
force on the deceased and committed his murder. It is a case of
cold blooded murder due to family property dispute because the
deceased wanted to purchase the land at Rajgir in the name of
his wife, who happens to be informant of the present case.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65937 of 2025(4) dt.13-01-2026
4/4
and specific and direct nature of accusation, the prayer for grant
of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…