Allowed¶21

Madan Sah v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Oct 2025CR. MISC./53843/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted; Sections 103 and 3(5) B.N.S.; Hattha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2024, District Muzaffarpur; death by antemortem hanging; single ligature mark; asphyxia per postmortem; death at sasural; wife promptly informed informant; custody since 10.04.2025; no criminal antecedent; trial not started; bail bond Rs. 20,000 each with two like sureties; Patna High Court Crl. Misc. No. 53843 of 2025; decided 17-10-2025 by Shailendra Singh, J.

What did the court decide?

Both petitioners enlarged on regular bail in Hattha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. ¶21

Madan Sah Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53843 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2024 Thana- Hattha District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

1. Madan Sah, son of Baleshwar Sah, village and P.O.- Maheshpur P.S.- Hattha District -Muzaffarpur

¶5

Rajesh Kumar, son of Madan Sah, village and P.O.- Maheshpur P.S.- Hattha District -Muzaffarpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Akbar Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 17-10-2025

¶12

1. Heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Singh, learned

¶13

counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Akbar Ali, learned APP for the State.

¶14

2. The petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Hattha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2024 dated 04.10.2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

¶15

3. The main submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioners are that the petitioner no.1 and petitioner no.2 are father-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased, there is no eye-witness to the alleged occurrence and the informant who happens to be brother of the deceased lodged

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53843 of 2025(3) dt.17-10-2025 2/3

¶17

the FIR with malafide intention as he wants to usurp the share of his deceased brother, in fact the deceased committed suicide by hanging and in this regard, medical finding given in the postmortem report of the deceased is relevant. It is further submitted that the deceased and his wife went to the deceased's sasural on 01.10.2024 and on the next date i.e. 02.10.2024 the deceased returned back but on the same day went again to his sasural thereafter on 03.10.2024 his body was found hanging in a mango orchard which was immediately informed to the informant by the deceased's wife on that very day which shows bonafide intention on the part of the deceased's wife. It is lastly submitted that both the petitioners have been languishing in jail since 10.04.2025 having no criminal antecedent and the petitioners' trial has not started till date.

¶18

4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the bail prayer of the petitioners.

¶19

5. Considering the above stated facts and mainly the fact that the deceased's body was found hanging in a mango orchard and on his body only one ligature mark was found and as per medical expert's opinion his death was due to asphyxia as a result of antemortem hanging and on the dead body of the deceased, except the said ligature mark, no other external injury

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53843 of 2025(3) dt.17-10-2025 3/3

¶21

was found and also taking into account the fact that the death of the deceased took place in his sasural and the same was immediately informed by his wife to the informant as appears from the FIR and also coupled with petitioners' custody period as well as their fair and clean antecedent, this court is inclined to release them on bail. Accordingly, let the petitioners namedabove be enlarged on bail in connection with Hattha P.S. Case No. 79 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court concerned.

¶22

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶23

Rajiv/-

¶24

U T

Madan Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madan Sah v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banti Mandal @ Banti Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sangram Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Arjun Rai @ Arjun Kumar Rai @ Arjun Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar Yadav @ Nitish Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Chandramani Yadav @ Chandan Vs The State of Bihar