Patna High Court
Nandlal ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, directing his release upon furnishing the required bond and sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Nandlal Chaudhary, was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act, 2023, following the alleged murder of his sister‑in‑law. The informant, brother of the deceased’s husband, claimed that the petitioner and his wife assaulted the victim to deprive her of property share, and later the victim was found dead. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no motive, and that the police investigation was mechanical, noting that the victim’s husband was not named as an accused. The State opposed bail but could not rebut the petitioner’s arguments about the lack of motive and investigative lapses. The Court, after considering the submissions, found merit in the petitioner’s claim of false implication and ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused under the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act, 2023 in view of the alleged murder and property‑related motive.
- Whether the police investigation was conducted in a manner that justifies continued detention of the petitioner.
- Whether the petitioner poses a flight risk or a risk of tampering with evidence.
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- property dispute
- murder
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69172 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- NOKHA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Nandlal Chaudhary S/O Dwarika Chaudhary Resident of Vill.- Kuri Tola,
P.S.- Nokha(M), Dist.- Rohtas, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the
BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody since
23.01.2025 and the informant alleges that his daughter was
married to Dadan Chaudhary about seven years back and, out of
the wedlock, four children were born. Further, on 15.06.2025, at
06:00 a.m., his daughter called her mother and informed that her
brother-in-law Nandlal Chaudhary (petitioner) and sister-in-law
(Aradhana Devi) are assaulting her so that they do not have to give
share in the property. Further, after sometimes, he received an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69172 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
information that his daughter has been killed and, accordingly,
reached the place of occurrence where her last rites were being
performed, hence, the police was informed and the remaining
portion of the dead body was sent for postmortem.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant
case by the informant being the brother of the husband of the
deceased. It is further submitted that the marriage of the deceased
with Dadan Chaudhary was performed seven years back and, out
of the wedlock, four children were born, but, in these seven years,
no case ever came to be instituted either by the deceased or the
informant alleging that she was being tortured at the hands of the
petitioner and his wife. It is next submitted that it absolutely does
not stand to reason that if the victim on 15.06.2025 had informed
the informant that she was being assaulted by the accused persons
then why he did not come to her house immediately. It is also
submitted that petitioner along with his wife are separate in mess
and property from the deceased and her husband. It is further
submitted that no useful purpose would have been served by
killing the deceased. It is next submitted that though it is alleged
that the dead body was being cremated and when the informant
reached the cremation ground after informing the police the burnt
dead body was taken out of the pyre for sending it for postmortem
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69172 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
but then it is submitted that if the dead body was being cremated,
it could not have been cremated only with the aid of the petitioner,
rather the male family members would have been involved
including the husband but then husband of the deceased is not an
accused in the instant case which casts an aspersion on the case of
the prosecution.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that the police investigate mechanically without applying
their mind. It is further submitted that suitable direction be given
to the Superintendent of Police, Rohat at Sasaram for investigating
the case from all angles because implication in a criminal case is a
serious issue as it has the impact of completely destroying the
family and the case in hand gives a clear picture that no useful
purpose would have been served by the petitioner and his wife by
killing the deceased. It is, thus, submitted that if the petitioner had
any issues relating to property then his competitor was his brother
i.e. the husband of the deceased and not the deceased herself. It is
next submitted that why the police did not investigate the matter
from this angle that who all were present at the cremation ground
when the body was being cremated, whether the husband along
with other family members were present there or not.
6. The Court finds merit in the submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69172 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposed the prayer for
regular bail of the petitioner but then are not in a position to rebut
the submissions of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that the case was investigated in a mechanical manner
by the police and the husband of the deceased is not an accused in
the case and the petitioner would not have gained anything by
killing the deceased.
8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on 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 in connection with
Nokha P.S. Case No. 197 of 2025.
9. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent
of Police, Rohat at Sasaram for his perusal and necessary action.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…