Patna High Court
Siddhant KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Siddhant Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 80(2) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita concerning alleged dowry harassment and murder of a woman named Ganga. The informant alleged that the petitioner was involved in a relationship with the deceased and was part of a conspiracy to extort dowry, while the petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and had a clean record. The State opposed the bail, but the informant’s counsel also agreed the petitioner was falsely implicated. The Court examined the allegations, the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the crime, and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation. It granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, reserving the right to cancel the bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 80(2) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged involvement in the alleged dowry harassment and murder warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 482(2), 61, 80(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- dowry harassment
- murder
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 80
- Section 61
- Section 482
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66749 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2024 Thana- Pothia District- Katihar
======================================================
Siddhant Kumar S/o Bundelal Pandit R/o Mohalla- Harda Bajar, P.S.- Harda,
District- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and
61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that his daughter was married to Ajit on 1-3-2023, after
marriage the accused persons including the petitioner started
torturing his daughter for non-fulfillment of dowry demand of a
motorcycle and Rs. 10 lakhs for purchasing land, further the
victim also disclosed that Ajit is having an extra marital affairs
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66749 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
2/4
with Ganga (petitioner) and when the victim protested the
relationship, Ajit threatened that if demand is not met, he will
marry Ganga, further Ajit on 26-10- 2024 informed from an
unknown number that victim died, accordingly he along with
the family members reached the place of occurrence and found
the dead body of the victim lying inside a room with multiple
injury marks and the accused persons had fled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence nor petitioner
is named in the FIR and his name transpired during the course
of investigation that he was in a relationship with the deceased.
It is submitted that petitioner and the deceased were known
from before, but were not in a relationship nor the FIR even
remotely discloses that petitioner in any manner was involved in
the occurrence. It is next submitted that even presuming what
has been alleged is true without admitting then petitioner cannot
be alleged to have abetted the offence. It is further submitted
that Ganga Kumari @ Ganga had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No. 43853 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66749 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
3/4
2025 and the same was allowed by an order dated 09.02.2026.
It is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application, but then learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the informant submits that petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the instant case, as deceased was never in a
relationship with the petitioner.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant, the petitioner above-
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned
trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case
is pending/successor court in connection with Pothiya Katihar
P.S. Case No. 101 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66749 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
4/4
learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner despite
giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the
investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned
police station through the learned Trial Court.
9. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…