Shyamnath Bhagat @ Shyam Nath Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29159 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2026 Thana- Jaitpur District- Muzaffarpur

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

Shyamnath Bhagat @ Shyam Nath Bhagat S/O Late Jaynandan Bhagat R/O Vill.- Karja @ Karja Nayatola, P.S.- Karja, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satendra Narayan Singh, APP ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 20-07-2026

¶9

Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the

¶10

learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

¶12

with Jaintpur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2026, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) of the B.N.S.

¶13

Allegedly on 04.02.2026, the informant has received a call that her husband would arrive in Muzaffarpur shortly, as he was coming to his house after taking leave from the work. When her husband did not return in the morning, she made repeated calls in his mobile, but the same was found switched off. Subsequently, she received an information from a villager that the dead body of her husband was found thrown in a secluded place. The informant rushed there and found the dead body of her husband; she suspected the hands of unknown persons in causing the death of her husband.

¶14

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29159 of 2026(3) dt.20-07-2026 2/3

¶16

the FIR has been instituted against unknown miscreants. However, during the course of investigation, one Santosh Kumar was apprehended, whose statement was recorded before the police, wherein he has confessed that he, along with one Sudhir, in course of taking liquor, entered into a maar-pit along with the deceased, due to which he sustained unfortunate injuries, which proved fatal. Thereafter, co-accused Santosh Kumar called upon his friend Abhimanyu Kumar, who had in turn informed his uncle( petitioner), and thereupon all of them, by keeping the dead body in a pick-up van, went on a secluded place and thrown the dead body. Learned Advocate for the petitioner referring to the confessional statement submitted that even if the confessional statement is taken to be true, there is no allegation that the petitioner was instrumental in causing death of the deceased, and even if for the sake of argument the same is accepted, the offence, which can hardly be made out against the petitioner, is of causing disappearance of evidence of offence or giving false information to screening offender, and thus constituting an offence under Section 238 of the BNS 2023, which is bailable in nature.

¶17

On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State submitted that the petitioner has played an active role in causing disappearance of the dead body of the deceased and, as such, his

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29159 of 2026(3) dt.20-07-2026 3/3

¶19

complicity cannot be denied.

¶20

Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the fact that there is no cogent material collected during the course of investigation, except the confessional statement, which only suggests about the allegation of causing disappearance of the dead body of the deceased, besides the fair antecedent of the petitioner, and the offence, even if taken to be true against the petitioner prima facie appears to be bailable in nature, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1^st Class, Muzaffarpur (west) in connection with Jaintpur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2026, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.

¶21

(Harish Kumar, J)

Shyamnath Bhagat @ Shyam Nath Bhagat v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamnath Bhagat @ Shyam Nath Bhagat 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

Nitish Kumar @ Aniket Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Naraj Kumar @ Niraj Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bindheshwari Choudhary @ Bindheswar Choudhary @ Bineshwar Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Om Prakash Jha @ Ramu Vs The State of Bihar

Neelam Sharma Vs The State of Bihar