Patna High Court
Kanhaiya Kumar @ Kanhaiya Kumar Das @ Kanhai Kumar DasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Kanhaiya Kumar, was charged under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for the alleged murder of his wife in a dowry‑related dispute. He applied for bail after an earlier bail plea had been rejected on merit, arguing that he has no prior criminal record, the victim suffered from breast cancer, and that co‑accused have been granted bail. The State opposed, contending that the petitioner, as the husband, played the primary role in the crime and that his defence was an after‑thought. The trial court report indicated that nine of twelve charge‑sheeted witnesses had already been examined and the trial was nearing its conclusion. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the prior denial of bail, and the trial’s progress, the High Court refused bail and directed the trial court to expedite the remaining proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the seriousness of the offences and prior denial of bail
- Whether the delay in trial and the petitioner’s custody status justify granting bail
- Whether the petitioner’s claims of the victim’s illness and lack of criminal antecedent affect bail eligibility
- Whether the granting of bail to co‑accused is relevant to the petitioner’s bail application
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- dowry death
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal procedure
- trial delay
- court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86535 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2023 Thana- VIDYAPATINAGAR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Kanhaiya Kumar @ Kanhaiya Kumar Das @ Kanhai Kumar Das Son of Sri
Narayan Das R/o Vill. - Garhsisai, P.S. - Vidyapatinagar, Dist.- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 36 of 2024 arising out of Vidyapati Nagar
P.S. Case No. 59 of 2023 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. As per prosecution case, marriage of informant's
daughter was solemnized with the petitioner in the year
2015. It is further alleged that informant's daughter was
tortured and assaulted by the petitioner and others due to non
fulfillment of demand of dowry. It is further alleged that on
13.05.2023 petitioner and others killed the informant's
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86535 of 2025(4) dt.18-03-2026
2/4
daughter by hanging her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
on 22.11.2024 the prayer for bail of the petitioner has
already been rejected on merit with an observation that if the
trial is not concluded within nine months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, petitioner may
renew his prayer for bail. He further submits that petitioner
has renewed his prayer for bail after near about one year
from the date of rejection of his prayer for bail. He further
submits that petitioner is in custody since 28.07.2023 and
bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the
petitioner has made a defence that information was given to
the prosecution side regarding the death of the deceased. He
further submits that victim was suffering from breast cancer.
He further submits that member of informant's side
participated in the last ceremony of the deceased. Informant
is not eye witness of the occurrence. Charge has been
framed. He further submits that co-accused Narayan Das and
Rajesh Kumar have been granted bail by co-ordinate Bench
of this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 46968 of 2023 and 63992 of
2023 respectively. He further submits that delay of trial is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86535 of 2025(4) dt.18-03-2026
3/4
not attributable to the present petitioner as he is in custody
since 28.07.2023.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submitted that petitioner being
husband of the deceased has not taken any positive approach
to resolve the dispute rather he played primary role which is
evident from the prosecution story. He further submits that
case of present petitioner is on different footing to the case
of aforesaid co-accused persons as petitioner is husband of
the deceased. They further submitted that in para 97 of the
case diary petitioner has not made any averment that
deceased is suffering from Cancer and all the defence taken
by the petitioner is afterthought.
6. In pursuance of the direction of this court, the
learned trial court vide letter no. 21 of 2026 dated
22.01.2026 has sent its report which reflects that out of 12
charge sheeted witnesses, 9 witness have already been
examined and trial is at the fag end.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, particularly keeping in view that earlier bail prayer of
the petitioner has already been rejected on merit as well as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86535 of 2025(4) dt.18-03-2026
4/4
report of the learned trial court, I am not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is hereby rejected.
8. However, the learned trial is directed to
conclude the trial as early as possible.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)
alok/-
U T
Checking your session…