Patna High CourtCR. MISC./4169/2026rejected

Gautam Kumar Sahu v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-26Mr. Justice Khatim Reza3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4169 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2025 Thana- MATIHANI District- Begusarai ====================================================== Gautam Kumar Sahu, aged about 30 years (Male), son of Ram Kishore Sahu, resident of village- Badalpura, P.S.- Matihani, Dist.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nakul Kumar Jamuar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bisheshwar Ram, APP For the Informant :

Ms. Archana Sinha, Senior Advocate Ms. Nisha Kumari, Advocate Mr. Manish Kumar Paswan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and Ms. Archana Sinha, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Matihani PS Case No.189 of 2025 dated 15.10.2025, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the daughter of the informant was residing in Patna in a Girls Hostel in connection with the preparation of competitive examination. On 09.10.2025, in the early morning, she proceeded for Patna and at about 3.00 PM, she told the informant that she has reached Patna. The informant was in touch with his daughter over

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4169 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026 2/3 mobile phone till 11.10.2025 and thereafter her mobile phone was found switched off. When the informant came to Patna and enquired about his daughter from the Coaching Institute and the Girls Hostel, he came to know that his daughter had not come in the hostel on 09.10.2025. In the meanwhile, he got information from a villager that the dead body of his daughter is lying in the field in a bag. Thereafter, he returned back to his village.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. FIR has been lodged against unknown. Name of the petitioner has come on the basis of user of mobile no. 9709272996. There was love affairs between the petitioner and the deceased and they were in relationship. On 09.10.2025, she had gone to Kishangnaj instead of Patna. The deceased herself committed suicide on account of some dispute with the petitioner. Nothing incriminating has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Nobody has seen the occurrence and only on the basis of suspicion the petitioner has been made accused in this case.

5. Learned APP as well as learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the informant has opposed the prayer for bail. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that the petitioner has made his confessional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4169 of 2026(3) dt.26-02-2026 3/3 statement regarding the involvement in the crime leading to recovery of mobile, charger and laptop of the deceased from the room the petitioner. Further, the petitioner himself has admitted that he was in relationship with the deceased. The CCTV footage of Toll Plaza also affirms the involvement of the petitioner in the crime. It is also submitted that the cause of death has been shown as Asphyxia due to strangulation.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties as well as the fact that the mobile, charger and laptop of the deceased has been recovered from the room of the petitioner and it is an admitted fact that the deceased was in relationship with the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner for grant of bail is rejected.

8. The learned Court below is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

9. The application stands dismissed.

(Khatim Reza, J) J. Alam/- U T