Patna High Court
Hira ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The bail application was denied, as the court was not inclined to release the petitioner in view of the seriousness of the dowry death charge and the statutory presumption against him.
Summary
The petitioner, Hira Chaudhary, was arrested in connection with the death of his wife, alleged to be a dowry death under Sections 304B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He applied for bail, asserting a clean antecedent, that the informant who lodged the FIR was not an eye‑witness, and that the death was a suicide by jumping into a well. The State opposed bail, relying on the statutory presumption that a woman who dies within seven years of marriage under suspicious circumstances is a dowry death, and argued that the husband is responsible for his wife's welfare. The court examined the lack of direct evidence against the petitioner and the applicability of the presumption, but held that the seriousness of the offence and the statutory presumption warranted denial of bail. Consequently, the bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused in a dowry death case under Sections 304B and 34 IPC.
- Whether the presumption under the dowry death provision applies despite the informant not being an eye‑witness.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and claim of suicide are sufficient to merit bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 34
Subjects
- dowry death
- bail
- IPC 304B
- presumption
- criminal procedure
- marital homicide
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91017 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2024 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Hira Chaudhary S/O Chotan Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Visthapit Nagdeeh,P.S-
Rajgir,Dist- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rana Baljit Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 21.11.2025. It is next submitted that informant alleges that
his daughter was married to the petitioner about two years ago,
further on 31.01.2024 he received a call on his mobile that his
daughter died by jumping in the well, thereafter he went to the
matrimonial house of his daughter, but no one was present and
saw broken utensils, food scattered all over the place and
noticed broken bangles of his daughter, thus, alleges that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91017 of 2025(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
accused persons killed his daughter for non-fulfillment of
previous dowry demand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that informant is not an eye
witness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges
around suspicion. It is also submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the
victim committed suicide by jumping in the well. It is also
submitted that no doubt the informant alleges that when he
entered the matrimonial house of the victim, he saw food
articles scattered, broken utensils and noticed broken bangles,
but then that in itself cannot be a ground to suspect the
involvement of the petitioner in the occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that what is not in dispute
rather stands admitted is that victim died within seven years of
marriage and presumption in law is against the petitioner. It is
further submitted that no doubt the informant is not an eye
witness to the occurrence, but then it is alleged that dowry was
demanded and on account of non-fulfillment of dowry demand,
the victim was tortured. It is also submitted that it is the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91017 of 2025(2) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
responsibility of the husband to ensure the well being of his
wife, but then it appears that the petitioner created conditions
conducive for the victim to take the extreme step of ending her
life.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to release the
petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, the instant bail application stands
rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.