Patna High Court
Sahendra MistriversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Sahendra Mistri, was arrested on 14 November 2024 in connection with a case alleging he murdered his sister‑in‑law, under Sections 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s case is based on an informant’s allegation that the petitioner tortured and killed his daughter‑in‑law, while the petitioner claims the allegations are fabricated and that he has a clean antecedent. The trial has not yet commenced and the case has only recently been committed to the Sessions Court, with no prospect of a speedy conclusion. The petitioner sought bail, arguing that the FIR is false, the informant is not an eye‑witness, and his continued detention is unjustified. The High Court, after considering the stage of the trial, the length of custody, and the prosecution’s opposition, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate exercise of discretion by the court in granting bail to an accused charged under Sections 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.?
- Does the pendency of the trial and the length of pre‑trial custody justify the grant of bail?
- Are the allegations in the FIR sufficient to deny bail, considering the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of eyewitness testimony?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
- Section 103 B.N.S.
- Section 3(5) B.N.S.
- false implication
- pending trial
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66616 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-304 Year-2024 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Sahendra Mistri S/O Karu Mistri R/O Vill.- Mohanpur Tola Bandha, P.S.-
Imamganj, Dist.- Gaya ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 19-03-2026 Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 14.11.2024
in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 304 of 2024, F.I.R. dated
13.11.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 103 and 3 (5)
of B.N.S.
3. According to prosecution case, informant alleged that,
daughter of the informant got married to petitioner about 10 years
ago, after which she was tortured by petitioner and others. On
12.11.2024, informant got to know that her daughter was killed by
petitioner and others.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present
case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66616 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
2/3
the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
Informant is not the eye-witness of the occurrence. On the basis of
suspicion, the petitioner has been made an accused in the present
case. The marriage of the petitioner was performed with the deceased
about 10 years back to the occurrence and the allegation against the
petitioner is that of having illicit relation with his bhabhi (sister-in-
law). Allegation against the petitioner is general and omnibus in
nature. He further submits that the police after investigation
submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in
custody since 14.11.2024 and trial has not begun as yet.
5. Vide order dated 31.01.2026, a report was called with
regard to the stage of the trial. Report dated 07.02.2026 of the learned
trial court reveals that the case has been committed to the court of
Sessions vide order dated 06.02.2026 and the trial is not likely to be
concluded in near future.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
report of the trial court as well as period of custody, let the
petitioner, above named, 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class,
Sherghatti, Gayaji in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 304 of
2024, subject to the following conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66616 of 2025(5) dt.19-03-2026
3/3
(i). 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.
(ii). If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(iii). 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
antecedent, 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 shall not be delayed for purpose
of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…