Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the court was not convinced that the petitioner was uninvolved in the alleged dowry death.
Summary
Mukesh Kumar Paswan applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in the death of his 19-year-old wife, who allegedly committed suicide following alleged dowry harassment and threats of a second marriage. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner and his family demanded an additional dowry of Rs.2,00,000 and tortured the victim, leading to her suicide within seven years of marriage, invoking Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. The petitioner contended he was absent, posted in Ranchi, and had no role in the victim's death, asserting no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, arguing the death was unnatural, linked to dowry demands, and that the investigation was ongoing. The court, finding the circumstances indicative of a dowry death and not persuaded by the petitioner's arguments, rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a case alleged to be dowry death.
- Whether the alleged conduct satisfies the criteria under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 for dowry death.
- Whether the petitioner had any participation in the victim's suicide.
- Whether the ongoing investigation precludes the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 3(5), 80
Subjects
- dowry death
- suicide
- anticipatory bail
- unlawful dowry demand
- B.N.S. 2023
- Section 80
- Section 3(5)
- unusual death
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77254 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar Paswan, son of Surendra Paswan, Village- Satanpur, PS-
Ujiarpur, Dist- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Prem Kumar Paswan, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest,
in connection with Dalsingh Sarai P.S. Case No.63 of 2025,
dated.24.02.2025, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 80 & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per allegation, 19 year old daughter of the
Informant was married to the Petitioner 02.05.2024 and she was
being tortured by the Petitioner and his family members for
additional demand of dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and she was also
threatened that if the additional demand of dowry was not
fulfilled, the Petitioner would solemnize second marriage. As
per further allegation, on 22.02.2025 at about 4:00 PM, the
victim went in her room and after closing the room she talked to
the Petitioner/husband on mobile and thereafter, a phone call
came from the Petitioner to the Informant that his daughter has
committed suicide, when the Informant went to the room along
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77254 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
with his family members, they found the room closed and when
the door was broken open, she was found hanging from the
ceiling fan and when she was brought to the hospital, she was
declared, brought dead.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this
case. He further submits that the Petitioner is in government
service and posted at Ranchi and this suicide was committed not
at his house but at her maike. Hence, there is no involvement of
the Petitioner in the alleged offence. Hence, it is not a case of
dowry death and even abatement of suicide because for making
out an offence of dowry death, there must be torturing soon
before the death. But, she was living at her maike and the
Petitioner was working at Ranchi and there is no such torturing.
He further submits that it is not a case of even abatement of
suicide, because he has no way contributed to the commission
of suicide by the victim.
5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail
petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier
either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.
6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the
bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77254 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail submitting that
suicide is an unnatural death and it has been committed within
seven years of the marriage due to mental torturing by the
Petitioner and his family members on account of non fulfillment
of additional demand of dowry. He also brought to the notice of
this Court that soon after the talk of the victim with the
Petitioner, she has committed suicide. It means, it was
provocation caused by the Petitioner/husband to the victim to
commit suicide. The investigation is still going on. At this stage,
privilege of anticipatory bail should not be granted to the
Petitioner.
8. Considering the fact that the victim/lady has died
an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage on
account of additional demand of dowry and threatening by her
husband to solemnize second marriage if the demand is not
fulfilled, I am not persuaded to enlarge the Petitioner on
anticipatory bail.
9. The bail petition of the Petitioner is rejected,
accordingly.
(Jitendra Kumar, J.)
Chandan/-
U T
Checking your session…