Patna High Court
Babaloo PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted given the grave nature of the murder allegations and the circumstances of the case.
Summary
Babaloo Pandey was arrested in connection with the murder of an informant’s daughter, alleged to be a dowry‑related killing. The FIR charges him under sections 103(1), 238, 61 and 3(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 and section 67 of the I.T. Act. Pandey contended that he was falsely implicated because he was the husband of the deceased and that the death resulted from a viral obscene video scandal, with no eyewitness and a one‑day delay in filing the FIR. The State opposed his bail application, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and the recovery of a burnt semi‑dead body. The Patna High Court, after considering these factors, refused bail, but permitted Pandey to file a fresh bail petition at a later stage. The order reflects the court’s view that the gravity of the charges outweighs the petitioner’s arguments for release.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of murder under sections 103(1), 238, 61 and 3(5) of the B.N.S, 2023 and section 67 of the I.T. Act
- Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and the absence of eyewitnesses justify bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61
- I.T. Act — s. 67
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- dowry death
- section 103
- section 238
- section 61
- section 3(5)
- section 67
- I.T. Act
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72853 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2025 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Babaloo Pandey S/o Bhrigunath Pandey Resident of village - Bhatiya, P.s.-
Ramgarhwa, Distt.- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Hemant Ray, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
5 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. A prayer for bail has been made on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Ramgarhwa P.S. Case no.197 of
2025 registered under section 103(1), 238, 61 and 3(5) of B.N.S,
2023 and 67 of I.T. Act.
3. Allegation in the F.I.R is that petitioner along with
his family members committed murder of informant’s daughter
for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the
reason that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. As a
matter of fact the deceased was in an illicit relation with one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72853 of 2025(5) dt.10-02-2026
2/2
Raju Yadav and some obscene videos had gone viral, on account
of which she was murdered by unknown persons. It is further
submitted that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence and
F.I.R has been lodged after a delay of one day. Further, the
petitioner is in custody since 17.07.2025 and undertakes to
cooperate in the case/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State.
6. Taking into consideration the seriousness of the
allegations that deceased was burnt to death and semi dead body
of the deceased was recovered, this Court is not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner who happens to be the husband of the
deceased, however, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew
his prayer for bail at the appropriate stage.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Harsh/-
U T
Checking your session…