Patna High Court
Alok KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail cannot be granted as the allegations and evidence do not sufficiently justify it.
Summary
Alok Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after learning that an FIR (Case No. 124 of 2025) had been lodged against him under Sections 103, 61(2)(b) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. for the alleged death of a girl who set herself on fire. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner called the girl, after which she was forced to sign a document and was set ablaze without a post‑mortem, while independent witness statements suggested a consensual relationship and that the girl, being mentally unstable, committed suicide. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the girl’s death was a suicide and that there was no basis to arrest him. The informant’s counsel contended that the petitioner’s involvement was evident and that the lack of a post‑mortem was suspicious. After reviewing the case diary and the submissions, the court found that the material on record did not justify the grant of anticipatory bail and consequently rejected the application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the FIR.
- Whether the allegations and evidence disclosed in the case diary establish a prima facie case warranting arrest.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103, 3(5), 61(2)(b)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- B.N.S.
- suicide
- post‑mortem
- criminal procedure
- mental instability
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74395 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2025 Thana- HUSSAINGANJ District- Siwan
======================================================
Alok Kumar S/O Birendra Prasad @ Rabindra Prasad R/O Vill.- Habibnagar,
P.S.- Hussainganj, Dist.- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate
: Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad, Advocate
: Ms. Nitu Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sumit Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 20-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner duly assisted by Mr. Ratneshwar Prasad and learned
APP representing the State as also Mr. Sumit Kumar, learned
counsel representing the informant.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Hussainiganj P.S. Case No. 124 of 2025
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103, 61(2)
(b) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 12.04.2025 by the
informant Hareram Bin.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the petitioner called his daughter. She went there and later
got the news about the fact that she has been put on fire, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74395 of 2025(4) dt.20-02-2026
2/3
victim was rushed to District Hospital, Siwan and then to Patna
but died on the way. The allegation is that Member of Zila
Parishad forcibly got signed on plain paper, without
postmortem, the mortal remains were consigned to flames. This
led to the F.I.R..
4. In this case, the coordinate Bench had called for the
case diary which is on record and learned APP Mr. Jitendra
Kumar Singh has taken this Court to statement of the
independent witnesses in paragraph no. 129 and 130 of the case
diary (Sandeep Kumar and Ajay Kumar) which shows that they
were in relationship, as the entire village knew about this
relationship, the girl wanted the petitioner to marry her, upon his
refusal, she put herself on fire.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
girl was not mentally stable, herself tried to commit suicide and
unfortunately died.
6. Learned counsel for the informant on the other
hand opposes the prayer submitting that the petitioner had called
her, what happened thereafter is part of the investigation but
the fact remains that she left this world and the accused ensured
that no postmortem is conducted.
7. Considering the submissions of the parties and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74395 of 2025(4) dt.20-02-2026
3/3
materials that has been recorded in the case diary, in that
background, it would be appropriate that the petitioner seek bail.
8. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…