Allowed¶6

Ghanshyam Tiwari @ Ghanshaym Tiwari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Jul 2025CR. MISC./2745/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.2745 of 2025, decided 02-07-2025, Sourendra Pandey, J. Bail granted to Ghanshyam Tiwari in Chand P.S. Case No.150 of 2024 (Kaimur/Bhabua) under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) B.N.S.; alleged dowry-related killing of wife; petitioner in custody since 23.09.2024; bail bond Rs.10,000/- with two sureties; conditions on attendance, antecedent verification and cancellation; order observations not to affect trial.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted: petitioner to be enlarged on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount, each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court, subject to the four stated conditions. ¶6

Ghanshyam Tiwari @ Ghanshaym Tiwari Vs The State… — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, prosecuted for offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. in Chand P.S. Case No.150 of 2024 and in custody since 23.09.2024, should be enlarged on bail.

¶2

Court's answer

Taking into account the facts, circumstances and materials collected during investigation, the Court directed that the petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, each to the satisfaction of the court below where the case is pending (or its successor court), subject to specified conditions (close relative as one bailor; physical presence in court on each trial date; bail bond cancellable on absence on two consecutive dates or violation of bail terms; court below to verify criminal antecedents, with steps for cancellation if concealment is found, but acceptance of bail bonds not to be delayed for verification).

¶6

Key takeaways

Clarificatory rider: observations, if any, made in the bail order shall have no bearing during the trial.obiter¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted. Petitioner (husband of the deceased) sought bail in connection with Chand P.S. Case No.150 of 2024, District Kaimur (Bhabua), registered for offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. Prosecution narrative: informant's daughter, married to the petitioner in 2015, was allegedly tortured by the petitioner and family members for non-fulfilment of dowry demand and for not bearing a child, and the informant learnt she had been done to death. Defence submissions included false implication, absence of complaint alleging dowry demand, no external injury on post-mortem, and that the petitioner, of clean antecedent, was in custody since 23.09.2024. Considering the facts and investigation materials, the High Court (Sourendra Pandey, J) enlarged the petitioner on bail on a bond of Rs.10,000/- with two like sureties, subject to conditions (one bailor a close relative; presence in court on each trial date; cancellation for absence on two consecutive dates or breach; antecedent verification by the court below without delaying acceptance of bail bonds). Observations in the order are not to bear on the trial.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2745 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-150 Year-2024 Thana- CHAND District- Kaimur (Bhabua)

¶3

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

¶4

Ghanshyam Tiwari @ Ghanshaym Tiwari S/o Madan Tiwari R/o VillageSaukhara, PS- Chand, District- Kaimur at Bhabua

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Parwej Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶9

6 02-07-2025

¶10

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶11

counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

¶12

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the

¶13

offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant was married to the petitioner in year 2015. Thereafter, the petitioner along with the other family members used to torture her for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and also for not bearing a child. It has further been alleged that the informant received an information from her relative that his daughter had been done to death by the petitioner and others.

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2745 of 2025(6) dt.02-07-2025 2/4

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being the husband of the deceased has falsely been implicated in this case and no such incident as stated has ever occurred. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner was married on 29.01.2015 and no complaint whatsoever was made by the informant or his family member till date alleging demand of dowry. Learned counsel has next stated that from perusal of the post mortem report, it would be evident that there was no external injury found on the body of the deceased. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner had taken his wife to the hospital for treatment, however, she was declared dead. It is submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and is in custody since 23.09.2024.

¶17

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have jointly opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and it has been stated that the petitioner was involved in the killing of his wife and from the viscera report, it is evident that ‘Zinc phosphide’ was found inside the body of the deceased and as such, she was poisoned to death by the petitioner and others. Learned counsel for the informant also submitted that the deceased was subjected to torture by the petitioner and others for not bearing a child and she had also

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2745 of 2025(6) dt.02-07-2025 3/4

¶19

complained about the same and had a fear that she would be done to death by the petitioner and others.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and taking into account the materials collected during the course of investigation, the petitioner above named be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount, each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Chand P.S Case No.150 of 2024, subject to the conditions:-

¶21

(i) one of the bailors shall be the close relative of the petitioner

¶22

(ii) the petitioner shall remain physically present in the Court on each date of trial.

¶23

(iii) in case of absence on two 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.

¶24

(iv) the learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the Court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2745 of 2025(6) dt.02-07-2025 4/4

¶26

above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in

¶27

the name of verification.

¶28