Patna High Court
Uttam Kumar @ Pappu Kumar @ PappuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court refused to grant bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Uttam Kumar, sought bail in a case registered under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, alleging that he was falsely implicated in the death of his wife, which the prosecution alleges was a dowry‑related murder. The petitioner argued that the FIR was lodged three days after the incident, the charge‑sheet was vague, he was not present at the scene, and he has no criminal record. The State contended that the post‑mortem report showed death by strangulation, indicating murder, and that as the husband the petitioner must explain the cause of death. The court examined the seriousness of the offences, the evidence of murder, and the petitioner’s role, and concluded that bail could not be granted. Consequently, the bail prayer was rejected and the trial was directed to be expedited, with a provision for a future bail application if the trial exceeds six months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged dowry‑related murder.
- Whether the delay in filing the FIR and the general nature of the charge‑sheet affect the grant of bail.
- Whether the petitioner, as the husband of the deceased, bears a statutory burden to explain the cause of death.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80(2)
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- murder
- asphyxia
- husband
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80911 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2024 Thana- NAYA RAM NAGAR District- Munger
======================================================
Uttam Kumar @ Pappu Kumar @ Pappu S/o Balmiki Tiwari @ Balmiki
Prasad Tiwari @ Prakash Mandal @ Balmiki @ Balmiki Mandal Resident of
Village - Barai Chak, Patam, P.S - Naya Ram Nagar, District - Munger
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Fazle Karim, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Naya
Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024, instituted for the offences
punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that daughter of
the informant has been done to death by her husband and in-
laws for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that there is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80911 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
delay of three days in lodging the FIR. No specific allegation
has been attributed against the petitioner rather the same is
general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner is husband of the
deceased. It is next submitted that the deceased was a short-
tempered lady and has committed suicide on a pity dispute. It is
further submitted that the petitioner was not present at the place
of occurrence. The deceased was also taken to the hospital and
during treatment she died. The petitioner is in custody since
19.05.2025 and has got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that
the petitioner is named in the FIR. It is also submitted that on
perusal of post-mortem report, it transpires that the victim died
death due to asphyxia caused by strangulation and the Forensic
team has opined that the victim had been murdered though the
petitioner had stated that victim had committed suicide. Further
the petitioner is husband of the deceased and, therefore, onus
lies upon him to explain the cause of death. Hence, the
petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence,
this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80911 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
7. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the Trial. However, if the trial is not concluded within a
period of six months from the date of receipt/production, the
petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the
Court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…