Indradeo Kumar @ Indra Dev Kumar @ Indradeo Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13791 of 2026 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60193 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2024 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Indradeo Kumar @ Indra Dev Kumar @ Indradeo Mahto S/o Baiju Mahto @ Baijnath Mahto Resident of Village - Patpara, P.S - Bibhutipur, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Satish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 80 and 238 of BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that earlier the bail petition of this petitioner was rejected by the learned Co-ordinate Bench vide Cr. Misc. No. 60193 of 2025.
4. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner along with others are alleged to have killed and burnt the informant's daughter due to non-fulfillment of dowry demand of bike.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13791 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/3
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in this case altogether four material witnesses have been examined, only Investigating Officer (I.O.) has to be examined. It has further been submitted that informant is examined as PW-4 and he has been declared hostile by the prosecution and in crossexamination this witness has stated that the petitioner was living at Delhi prior to occurrence and he had arrived from Delhi on the information of the occurrence. He has further stated that the deceased has died due to ailment. In court question this witness has categorically stated that the petitioner was living outside at the time of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the evidence of the informant it is clear that he has not alleged any allegation against this petitioner. Other witnesses have also not said anything regarding the role of this petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is in judicial custody since 18.06.2025.
6. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13791 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 3/3 bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 605 of 2025 arising out of Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 237 of 2024, G.R. No. 676 of 2024 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Rosera (Samastipur).
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T