Patna High Court
Bachcha PandeyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed the petitioners' anticipatory bail, subject to specified conditions, under Section 438(2) CrPC read with Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
Petitioners Bachcha Pandey and Kamla Devi sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging they killed an informant's daughter, an offence under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. They contended they were merely the father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law of the deceased, that the death was due to poison with no external injuries, and that there were no eyewitnesses, emphasizing their clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the facts and the lack of substantive evidence, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., including bond requirements and personal appearance obligations. The order clarified that any observations made would not affect the trial. The bail was ordered to be effective for four weeks from the date of the order.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations of murder under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the absence of external injuries, the post‑mortem indicating poison, and lack of eyewitnesses justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean criminal antecedents influence the decision to grant bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- murder
- poison death
- clean antecedents
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9671 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-567 Year-2025 Thana- CHAKIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Bachcha Pandey S/O Sri Baidhnath Pandey R/O Village- Bansghat, Tola-
Dharampur, Ward No.-12, P.S- Chakia, Distt.- East Champaran.
2. Kamla Devi W/O Bachcha Pandey R/O Village- Bansghat, Tola-
Dharampur, Ward No.-12, P.S- Chakia, Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Chakia P.S. Case No.567 of 2025 registered for the
offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the
named accused persons, including the petitioners, have killed
the daughter of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the
deceased. It has further been submitted that the son of the
petitioners marriage with the deceased on his own and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9671 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
petitioners had no concern with their family affairs. It has next
been submitted that even from the postmortem report, it would
be evident that there is no external injury found and there is a
suspicious death due to poison, as per the inquest report. It has
also been submitted that there is no eyewitness to the occurrence
and the petitioner had been made accused merely on suspicion.
It has lastly been submitted that petitioners carry clean
antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the
petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the
event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Chakia P.S. Case No.567 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
as well as subject to the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9671 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically
present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive
dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail
bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by
the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in
similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall
be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any
stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed
their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take
step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners.
However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the
above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose
of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.