Patna High Court
Sunil KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied; the petitioners must surrender for a surrender‑cum‑bail application.
Summary
The petitioners Sunil Kumar, Shyam Kumar and Ramakant Prasad sought anticipatory bail in connection with a murder case (Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 211 of 2025) where a 15‑year‑old girl was found hanged in a house belonging to a fifth accused, Sanjay Kumar. The prosecution alleged that the three petitioners were part of a conspiracy to murder the girl, citing the FIR, inquest report, forensic‑science‑lab report and post‑mortem findings indicating death by asphyxia due to hanging. The petitioners contended that they were falsely implicated, that the police recovered the body in the presence of locals, and that there was no direct evidence against them, highlighting clean antecedents for two of them. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence under Sections 103 and 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and the corroborative statements of witnesses. The High Court, after reviewing the case diary, declined to grant anticipatory bail, finding the material evidence sufficient to justify denial. However, the Court allowed the petitioners to surrender within six weeks, directing the trial court to decide any surrender‑cum‑bail application on the same day without prejudice to the earlier rejection.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 103 and 61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the evidence presented.
- Whether the prosecution's evidence establishes a prima facie case sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 61(2)(a)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- hanging
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 103
- Section 61(2)(a)
- high court
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8384 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2025 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Sunil Kumar Son of Late Deonarayaan Prasad R/o Village - Ghorahasan,
P.S. - Ghorahasan, Dist. - East Champaran.
2. Shyam Kumar Son of Late Deonarayan Prasad R/o Village - Ghorahasan,
P.S. - Ghorahasan, Dist. - East Champaran.
3. Ramakant Prasad Son of Late Rambalak Prasad R/o Village - Ghorahasan,
P.S. - Ghorahasan, Dist. - East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sarvan Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, A.P.P
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 211 of 2025 lodged
on 03.07.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 103 &
61(2)(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the
Court of S.D.J.M. Dhaka, East Champaran.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
five named accused persons including the present petitioners.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8384 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/4
The informant has stated that she and her 15-year-old daughter
doing maid work. On 01.07.2025 at around 8 pm, her daughter
did not return home. Thereafter, she went to the houses where
she worked, looking for her. When the informant finally reached
Sanjay Kumar's house, she found her daughter's slippers at the
main gate and the door was locked from the outside. The
informant started screaming loudly, and people from the
neighbourhood gathered. At that very moment, the police
arrived, opened the main gate, and went inside and found her
daughter's body hanging from a fan in Sanjay Kumar's bedroom.
The police took down her daughter's body and took it to Sadar
Hospital, Motihari, for post-mortem examination. The informant
further claims that all the named accused persons have
murdered her daughter with wrong intentions under a
conspiracy.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel submits that the petitioners have been falsely
implicated in this case. He further submits that the police has
broken the door and recovered the dead body in presence of
several local persons. He submits that there is no evidence
against the petitioners. Counsel also submits that the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8384 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/4
nos.1 & 2 have clean antecedent, whereas, the petitioner no.3
has three criminal antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners and submits that in the rejection order, it
has been acknowledged by the Sessions Judge that in para 4 of
case diary, inquest report is mentioned in which cause of death
appears to have occurred due to strangulation. In para 5 of the
case diary, FSL report is mentioned in which type of crime is
murder/suicide. Informant in her re-statement at para no.6 and
other prosecution witnesses in para 7, 10, 11 of the case diary
have supported the case of prosecution. In para 23 of the case
diary, post-mortem report is mentioned in which cause of death
is Asphyxia due to hanging.
6. In the present facts and circumstances and upon
perusal of the case diary, this Court is not inclined to grant bail
to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of
the petitioners are hereby rejected.
7. However, liberty is granted to the petitioners that if
they surrenders before the concerned Trial Court within a period
of six weeks from today then in that case, the Trial Court is
directed to pass order on their surrender-cum-bail application on
the same day, without being prejudice that the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8384 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
4/4
of the petitioners has been rejected by this Court and the Trial
Court shall pass order on the merit of this case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
Divyansh/-
U T
Checking your session…