Shubham Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dewendra Narayan Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 20-07-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶13

In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 594 of 2025 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 140(1), 80, 238, 3(5) of BNS.

¶14

As per prosecution case, the daughter of the informant married with the petitioner on 12.02.2025. On 13.08.2025, the informant gave a written report that the petitioner and other co-accused persons had been demanding dowry. He further stated that after he spoke with his daughter on the night of 12.08.2025, the mobile phones of both his daughter

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24136 of 2026(5) dt.20-07-2026 2/4

¶16

and accused persons were switched off and the informant expressed suspicion that they had killed his daughter and made her dead body disappear.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The informant has showed only suspicion with general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused persons without any substantive material. The petitioner and his family members never subjected the daughter of the informant to any type of torture and never demanded any dowry. The daughter of the informant was in habit of frequently visiting her parents' house and in the night of 12.08.2025 the daughter of the informant left the house of the petitioner and the petitioner made a number of calls to the informant and his family members. But the informant did not bother to search his daughter rather filed this false case without any basis. Learned counsel further submits that subsequently the dead body of the daughter of the informant was recovered from a river and it appears to be a case of drowning. After postmortem the doctor has not opined on the cause of death and opinion has been reserved for chemical analysis. In the postmortem report it has also been mentioned that the death occurred within 2-4 days from the time of autopsy

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24136 of 2026(5) dt.20-07-2026 3/4

¶19

and the postmortem was conducted on 20.08.2025. Learned counsel further submits that even if the death occurred 4 days prior to the postmortem, it might have occurred on 16.08.2025 and death did not occur on 13.08.2025 and the informant lodged written report before the police on 13.08.2025 expressing his suspicion about the death of his daughter. The petitioner is in custody since 25.08.2025 and charge sheet has been submitted. The petitioner is having clean antecedent.

¶20

Learned APP opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that the daughter of the informant was living in her matrimonial home and her dead body was recovered from a river.

¶21

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the doubtful nature of allegation and also considering the submission of charge sheet, period of custody of the petitioner and his clean antecedent, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur/concerned Court in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 594 of 2025, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24136 of 2026(5) dt.20-07-2026 4/4

¶23

480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also the following conditions :

¶24

(i) One of the bailors will be a close

¶25

relative of the petitioner.

¶26

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

¶27

(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.

¶28

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶29

DKS/-

¶30

U T

Shubham Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shubham Kumar 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

Rakesh Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kumar @ Munmun Vs The State of Bihar

Saroja Devi @ Saroj Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Umashankar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar

Virendra Vaitha Vs The State of Bihar

Shakir @ Sakir Vs The State of Bihar