Dismissed¶25

Mahesh Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC15 Jul 2025CR. MISC./15405/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; CR. MISC. No.15405 of 2025; order dated 15-07-2025; Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra; anticipatory bail rejected; Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024, District Darbhanga; Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita; murder of informant's daughter for non-fulfillment of dowry demand; petitioners are parents-in-law of deceased; plea of general and omnibus allegations; no criminal antecedent; charge-sheet submitted; witnesses Paras 4, 5 & 6 supported prosecution; liberty to surrender within six weeks and seek regular bail without prejudice.

What did the court decide?

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the nature and gravity of the evidence as also the materials available in the case diary, the Court was not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. ¶23

Mahesh Paswan Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶25

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners apprehending arrest in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024, registered for offences punishable under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, arising from accusations of murdering the informant's daughter for non-fulfillment of dowry demand.

¶16

Ratio / Principle

¶23

Key takeaways

The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is rejected; however, if the petitioners surrender before the court below within six weeks and pray for regular bail, the court below would consider the same in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — Rejected. Mahesh Paswan and Pramila Devi, stated to be the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, apprehended arrest in Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024 (Thana Kamtaul, District Darbhanga), registered for offences punishable under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, the prosecution case being murder of the informant's daughter for non-fulfillment of dowry demand. Counsel for the petitioners urged innocence, false implication, absence of any specific or direct overt act (the allegations being general and omnibus), performance of the last rites in the petitioners' presence, separate residence/mess from the deceased and her husband, and no criminal antecedent; the learned A.P.P. opposed, highlighting the heinous nature of the offence, support to the prosecution case by witnesses of Paras 4, 5 and 6, and submission of the charge-sheet. Taking into account the nature and gravity of the evidence and the case-diary materials, Rudra Prakash Mishra, J. (order dt. 15-07-2025) declined bail and rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail, while observing that if the petitioners surrendered before the court below within six weeks and prayed for regular bail, the same would be considered in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15405 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2024 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Mahesh Paswan S/O Late Ramvilash Paswan R/O Village- Brahampur, P.SKamtaul, District- Darbhanga.

¶5

Pramila Devi W/O Mahesh Paswan R/O Village- Brahampur, P.S- Kamtaul, District- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Devendra Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

3 15-07-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶14

A.P.P. for the State. Perused the case diary.

¶15

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶16

As per prosecution case, the accusation against the accused persons including the petitioners is committing murder of the Informant’s daughter for non-fulfillment of dowry demand.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence as

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15405 of 2025(3) dt.15-07-2025 2/3

¶19

alleged against them and have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioners are father-in-law and mother-inlaw of the deceased. There is no specific or direct allegation of any overt act against the petitioners rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. He further submits that after the death of the deceased, the Informant was properly informed by the accused persons and, in their presence, the last rites was done. The petitioners have never demanded any dowry from the deceased or her family members. Both the petitioners were living separately from the mess and business of the deceased and her husband. The petitioners have no criminal antecedent as have been stated in paragraph no.3 of the present anticipatory bail application. The petitioners have no concern with the alleged occurrence.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, stating that the offence alleged is heinous in nature. He further submits that the witnesses in Para- 4, 5 & 6 have supported the prosecution case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.

¶21

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the nature and gravity of the evidence as also taking into account the materials available in the case diary,

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15405 of 2025(3) dt.15-07-2025 3/3

¶23

this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.

¶24

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

¶25

petitioners, above named, is rejected. If the petitioners surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

¶26

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶27

rishi/-

¶28

U T

Mahesh Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahesh Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Singh @ Mukesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Abhishek Kumar @ Raja @ Raja Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Kumar @ Manoj Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Ani @ Ani Kumar @ Dhiraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar