Patna High Court

Pankaj Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 11 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The court held that the petitioner, being the husband of the deceased, must explain the circumstances of her death and therefore bail cannot be granted at this stage.

Summary

The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Mahto, sought bail in a case under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, where his wife was allegedly killed by her in‑laws over a dowry demand. The prosecution alleged the death was a dowry‑related homicide, while the petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated and had no specific allegation against him. The petitioner had been in custody since 30 July 2025 and asserted he had no prior criminal record. The State opposed bail, arguing that as the husband of the deceased, the petitioner bears the onus of explaining the circumstances of her death. The court, finding the onus applicable and the allegations serious, refused bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing the petitioner to renew the bail application if the trial exceeds four months.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the husband of a dowry‑death victim under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Whether the petitioner’s alleged false implication and lack of specific charges justify bail.
Whether the husband bears the onus of explaining the circumstances of his wife's death.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80

Subjects

bail
dowry death
husband
onus of explanation
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure
false implication

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90689 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- KATHAIYA District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Pankaj Kumar Mahto S/o Late Lal Babu Mahto R/o village- Dora Chhapra,
                 PS- Kathiya, District- Muzaffarpur



                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar



                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Bela Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-03-2026             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State. Perused the case diary.

                           2.      The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Kathaiya P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025 instituted for the offence

                   under Sections 80 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                           3.      Prosecution case in short is that daughter of the

                   informant has been done to death at her matrimonial house by

                   her in-laws due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry.

                           4.      It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

                   that the petitioner is in custody since 30.07.2025. Petitioner

                   bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in

                   paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90689 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
                                            2/3




                  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. Charge sheet has already been

          submitted in this case.

                  6.      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.

                  7.      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, this Court is not inclined to

          grant bail at this stage. Prayer for bail is hereby rejected.

                  8.      The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as

          expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and

          unnecessary adjournments.

                  9.       However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his

          prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within a period of

          four months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90689 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     order.


                                                                 (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

Raj Kishore/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…