Patna High Court
Sonu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied bail, holding that the presumption of guilt in dowry death cases and the seriousness of the allegations warranted continued detention.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar, was arrested in connection with the alleged dowry death of his wife under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He applied for regular bail, claiming a clean antecedent, that he was not present at the scene, and that the informant (the victim's mother) and her son had become hostile during trial, even reaching a compromise. The State opposed bail, emphasizing that the victim died within seven years of marriage, invoking the statutory presumption against the husband and his family, and pointing to a post‑mortem report indicating death by strangulation. The court examined the bail submissions and the statutory presumption but found the prosecution's case sufficiently serious to justify continued detention. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application and ordered the matter to be sent to the trial court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the accused in a dowry death case under the B.N.S. and Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the statutory presumption of guilt under dowry death provisions applies to the petitioner.
- Whether the informant's hostility and alleged compromise affect the merit of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 3(5), 80(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- presumption of guilt
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8508 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2025 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Sonu Kumar S/O Surendra Prasad Singh R/O Village- Fatehpur Wala Ward
No. 6, P.S- Mushrigharari, Distt.- Samastipur. (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bindeswari Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2025 and is a person
with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that her
daughter was married to petitioner on 19.05.2024. Further, after
10 months of marriage the accused persons including the
petitioner started demanding dowry of Rs.5 Lacs and on account
of non-fulfilment of the demand the victim was tortured. On
10.05.2025, informant received an information that accused
persons have killed her daughter. Accordingly, she went to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8508 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/3
place of occurrence and saw the dead body of her daughter
lying, thus alleges that accused persons killed her daughter and
thereafter hanged her dead body.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant being husband of the deceased. It is next submitted
that no doubt victim died within seven years of marriage but
then all deaths are not dowry death. It is also submitted that
informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and the entire
allegations hinges around suspicion and even allegation of
demand of dowry and torture is general and omnibus in nature.
It is further submitted that charges have been framed and trial
has commenced and the informant along with brother of the
deceased have become hostile in the trial and a compromise has
been entered in between the parties as such no useful purpose
would be served by keeping the petitioner in jail. It is also
submitted that petitioner at the time of occurrence was not
present at the place of occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. vehemently opposes the bail
application and submits that what is not dispute rather stands
admitted is that victim died within seven years of marriage and
the presumption in law is against the husband and his family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8508 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
3/3
members. It is also submitted that it absolutely does not stand to
reason that how the informant who instituted the FIR became
hostile in the trial along with her son when the post mortem
report clearly records that the cause of death as cardio
respiratory failure due to strangulation which amply
demonstrates that the victim was strangulated to death.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail
7. The prayer of the petitioner for regular bail stands
rejected.
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Trial
Court.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…