Patna High Court
Pawan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Pawan Kumar was arrested in a Mahila Police Station case alleging dowry demand of Rs. 2,00,000, assault, attempted strangulation and attempted arson against his wife. The petitioner claimed innocence, arguing that the injury reports were inconsistent and that he had a clean antecedent, with the chargesheet already filed and having been in custody since July 2025. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences under Sections 85, 109, 127(2), 352 and 351(2)(3) of the B.N.S., 2023. The court examined the nature of the injuries, the petitioner’s clean record, the period of custody and the filing of the chargesheet, and found no compelling reason to deny bail. Accordingly, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other procedural requirements.
Issues considered
- What considerations justify granting bail to an accused charged under Sections 85, 109, 127(2), 352 and 351(2)(3) of the B.N.S., 2023?
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent, period of custody and filing of the chargesheet outweigh the seriousness of the alleged offences for bail purposes?
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109, 127(2), 3(5), 351(2)(3), 352, 85
- B.N.S.S. — s. 480(3)
Subjects
- bail
- dowry harassment
- domestic violence
- attempted murder
- assault
- Section 480(3)
- B.N.S. 2023
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92072 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Katihar
======================================================
Pawan Kumar S/o Prakash Roy, Resident of Village- Sikkat Semapur, P.S.-
Barari, District- Katihar.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Sweety Kumari W/O Pawan Kumar D/O Ramesh Chnadra Roy, R/O -
Mirchaibari, P.S- Sahayak, Dist- Katihar.
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimal Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 14 of 2025 dated
26.04.2025, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 85, 109, 127(2), 352 and 351(2)(3) read with Section
3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner has been
married with informant and they have two children out of this
wedlock. The allegation against the petitioner and other co-
accused persons is demand of Rs. 2,00,000/- as dowry and on
non-fulfillment of this demand, consequent torture and assault.
Further allegation is that the petitioner tried to strangulate the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92072 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
2/4
informant and he also tried to set her on fire by pouring
kerosene oil.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in the present case. The prosecution story is not
believable. If the petitioner intended to cause death of the
informant, he would either have strangulated her or have set her
on fire as there was no inhibiting circumstances. Moreover, if
the petitioner would have strangulated the informant, why
would he set her on fire. The allegation of demand of dowry of
Rs. 2,00,000/- is absurd as marriage took place eight years back
and the couple have two children out of this wedlock aged about
seven years and three years. The informant was initially
examined at the Sadar Hospital, Katihar and the injury report
issued by Sadar Hospital, Katihar shows only an abrasion over
the neck associated with neck pain and body ache and there is
no mentioning of any burn injury. Subsequently, the informant
got herself examined in Katihar Medical College and forged
report has been prepared showing superficial first degree burn
over lower chest and abdomen. However, this report is also
falsified by the further statement of the victim / informant,
wherein she stated that though her husband poured kerosene
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92072 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
3/4
over her, but he did not set her on fire. Learned counsel next
submits that petitioner is having clean antecedent and
chargesheet has been submitted. Learned counsel lastly submits
that petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State
opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
nature of injury of the petitioner and also considering his clean
antecedent, his period of custody and submission of
chargesheet, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be
released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Katihar / concerned Court, in connection
with Mahila P.S. Case No. 14 of 2025, subject to the condition
laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and other
following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and
every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92072 of 2025(3) dt.25-02-2026
4/4
trial Court.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…