Patna High Court
Bhushan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail as there is no material linking them to the alleged offence and the statutory conditions for bail under the BNSS, 2023 are satisfied.
Summary
The petitioners, Bhushan Kumar and Rameshwar Mehta, sought anticipatory bail in a case where they were named among five accused for alleged torture of an informant's granddaughter, leading to her suicide by poison. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners were involved, while the petitioners claimed innocence, stating that the deceased's husband was the actual perpetrator of the torture. The petitioners' counsel highlighted that one petitioner had a pending excise case but no material linking them to the death, and the other had a clean record. The State opposed bail, relying on independent witness statements implicating the husband. The court, after considering the lack of direct evidence against the petitioners and the provisions of the BNSS, 2023, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond and conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 in view of the allegations under Sections 103(1) and 238.
- Whether the presence of a pending criminal case against one petitioner precludes the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 103(1), 2(1)(d), 238, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- cruelty
- suicide
- criminal antecedent
- Section 103
- Section 238
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8804 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- Pastpar Pusthi District- Saharsa
======================================================
1. Bhushan Kumar S/o Rameshwar Mehta Resident of - Ward no. 2, Pama, P.S
- Pastpar, District - Saharsa, Pin - 852107
2. Rameshwar Mehta S/o Jamun Mehta Resident of - Ward no. 2, Pama, P.S -
Pastpar, District - Saharsa, Pin - 852107
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Piyush Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and
Learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Pastpar P.S. Case No.50 of 2025 lodged on
14.06.2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1)
and 238 of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
five named accused persons including the present petitioners
with allegation that they tortured the informant’s grand daughter
due to which she consumed poison which resulted into her
death.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8804 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel also submits that the petitioners are brother-in-law
(Bhaisur) and father-in-law of the deceased. He further submits
that husband of the deceased used to torture and assault his wife
due to which she consumed poison and she died.
5. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the
petitioner No.1 is not clean as there is one criminal case relating
to Excise Act, pending against him, whereas petitioner No.2 has
clean antecedent. He further submits that case diary has been
called for in which there is no materials against the petitioners
about commission of any role due to which she caused death.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners and submits that in the case diary,
independent witnesses have accepted that dispute and hot
discussion always used to take place between the husband and
wife and only due to torture made by her husband, she
consumed poison. Upon perusal of the statement of independent
witnesses, paragraph 121 and 122, it is very much clear that it is
husband, who is responsible for such suicide done by wife.
7. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of
this case, let the above named petitioners be released on
anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8804 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
learned Court below within a period of 4 weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand)
each as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the
satisfaction of ACJM-2nd, Saharsa, in connection with Pastpar
P.S. Case No.50 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J)
prakashmani/-
U
Checking your session…