Patna High Court
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied because the offence is serious and the trial has already commenced, requiring the accused to explain the circumstances of the death.
Summary
The Patna High Court considered the bail application of Sanjay Yadav, husband of a woman who was allegedly killed by her in‑laws. He is charged under Sections 302 and 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for murder. The petitioner claimed no prior criminal record, alleged false implication, and argued that only one of six prosecution witnesses had been examined. The State opposed, citing the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s marital relationship to the deceased, and relied on a Supreme Court precedent that bail is rarely granted once trial begins in serious crimes. The Court held that, given the gravity of the charge and that trial proceedings had already started, bail could not be granted at this stage and ordered the trial to be expedited, allowing a fresh bail application after six months if the trial remains pending.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted in a murder case under Sections 302 and 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 when trial has commenced.
- Whether the accused’s relationship as husband of the deceased creates a duty to explain the circumstances of death, affecting bail eligibility.
- Whether the limited examination of prosecution witnesses (one out of six) warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Section 302
- Section 34
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- high court
- serious offence
- trial commencement
- presumption of guilt
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85033 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-553 Year-2023 Thana- BANKA District- Banka
======================================================
Sanjay Yadav @ Sanjay Kumar Son of Lalu Yadav Resident Of Village -
Katoriya Chapar, P.S. - Banka, Dist. - Banka.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Prakash Dwivedi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Banka
P.S. Case No. 553 of 2023 instituted for the offence under
Sections 302 & 34 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Earlier vide order dated 19.03.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No.
4482 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this
Court.
3. Prosecution case in short is that sister of the
informant has been done to death at her matrimonial house by
her in-laws.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that the petitioner is in custody since 09.08.2024. Petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85033 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in
paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s
counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present
case. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. There is no
specific allegation attributed to the petitioner, rather allegation is
general and omnibus in nature. It is submitted that petitioner has
suffered long incarceration, hence, he deserves the privilege of
bail.
6. A report was called for from the Court below and it
is reported that one (1) out of six (6) prosecution witnesses have
been examined in this case.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is
fervently submitted that petitioner, being the husband of the
deceased, bears the onus of explaining the circumstances
leading to her death. Learned APP has further relied upon a
decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC
Online SC 3539 (X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in
paragraph No.14, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as under:
“14. Ordinarily in
serious offences like rape, murder,
dacoity, etc., once the trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85033 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
commences and the prosecution starts
examining its witnesses, the Court be
it the Trial Court or the High Court
should be loath in entertaining the
bail application of the accused.”
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and taking into account the fact that petitioner, being
the husband of the deceased, bears the onus of explaining the
circumstances leading to her death as also the fact that trial has
commenced, this Court is not inclined to grant bail at this stage.
Prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
9. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as
expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and
unnecessary adjournments.
10. However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six
months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…