Patna High Court
Dhananjay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court refused to grant bail, holding that the specific and direct allegations against the petitioner warranted continued custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhananjay Kumar, was arrested on 15 May 2025 in connection with a murder case (P.S. Case No. 147 of 2025) under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023, alleging the death of a child named Deepika. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner had knowledge of the death and had communicated it to his brother and a villager, supported by a statement recorded in the case diary and post‑mortem findings indicating anti‑mortem injuries. The petitioner contended that he has a clean record, that the allegations are fabricated, and that the informant is not an eye‑witness, seeking bail. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the specific allegations, the recorded statement, and forensic evidence suggesting foul play. The Court, after considering the seriousness of the charge, the direct allegations, and the evidentiary material, declined to grant bail, refusing the petitioner's prayer.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a murder case under Section 103(1) of the B.N.S., 2023 given the specific allegations and available evidence.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1)
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Section 103
- B.N.S. 2023
- post‑mortem
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86343 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-147 Year-2025 Thana- PIRBAHOR District- Patna
======================================================
Dhananjay Kumar S/O Late Rambriksha Yadav Resident of village- Jinda
Bigha, P.S.- Silao, District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Premchandra Yadav, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Madhukar Anand, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. Premchandra Yadav, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Madhukar Anand, learned counsel for the
Informant and Mr. Gauri Shankar Gupta, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
15.05.2025, in connection with Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 147 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 22.02.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 103(1)of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the daughter
of the informant was married to the petitioner in the year 2016
and she had a 5 year old daughter, namely, Divyanshi. On 21 st
June, 2025, he received a call from Ramchandra, a villager of
the petitioner, informing that his daughter Deepika had died but
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86343 of 2025(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
without providing details. Repeated attempts to contact the
petitioner and his wife failed, as their house was locked. When
the police officials from Pirbahore Police Station opened the
locked room, they found Deepika lying dead. Neighours
disclosed that a quarrel had occurred between the petitioner and
his wife the previous night. On this basis, the informant
suspects that the petitioner murdered his daughter.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
In fact, the informant is not the eye witness of the alleged
occurrence and merely on the basis of suspicion, the petitioner
has been made accused in the present case.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant and learned
APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner
has knowledge about the death of the deceased and he has
already informed his brother, namely, Anjay Kumar and he has
informed Ramchandra Prasad Yadav and the statement of
Ramchandra Prasad Yadav was recorded in paragraph-133 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86343 of 2025(3) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
the case diary in which he has stated that the brother of the
petitioner has informed Ramchandra Prasad Yadav on
21.02.2025 itself about the death of the deceased which suggests
that the petitioner has knowledge about the death of the
deceased and he has shared the same with his brother and he has
shared with Ramchandra Prasad Yadav which is in paragraph-
133 of the case diary and apart from aforesaid from perusal of
the postmortem report, it appears that the time of death 24 hours
prior to the postmortem report examination as well as a number
of anti mortem injuries were found on the person of the
deceased.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and there is specific and direct allegation against the
petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in
connection with Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 147 of 2025 pending
in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…