Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu Yadav @ Chotu Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14436 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- RANIGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Chhotu Kumar @ Chhotu Yadav @ Chotu Kumar Yadav Son of Gajendra Yadav Resident of Village - Belsara Gate No.- 10, P.S.- Raniganj, District - Arariya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Soni Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025 dated 12.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 238 of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant, namely, Ramchandra Yadav alleged that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the deceased nine years ago and after some time of marriage due to some dispute, the petitioner used to assault the daughter of the informant which was informed by his daughter. It is further alleged that on 11.03.2025 at about 23:30 hours, the brother of this petitioner and others informed that his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14436 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/3 daughter has been killed by the petitioner and her dead body has been thrown in the bush beside his village, the informant and others went to that place and found the dead body of the deceased. Upon information to the police, the police arrived there, the informant expressed firm belief that his daughter was done to death by this petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that although the petitioner is the husband of the deceased but he denies the factum of having murdered his wife, the dead body was not recovered from the closed borders of his house rather the same was recovered outside his village and everyone was knowing the fact but the brother of the petitioner is in hands in gloves with the informant and trying to malign his image and to falsely implicate him so as to take control of the family property. From the impugned order, it appears that except the confessional statement of the petitioner there is no other material so as to substantiate the allegation. The present application for bail on behalf of the petitioner has been filed through Patna High Court Legal Service Committee. The petitioner is in custody in this case since 13.03.2025 having no criminal antecedent. It is further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14436 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 3/3 submitted that the charges have been framed against the petitioner and the petitioner is ready to co-operate in the trial.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Araria in connection with Raniganj P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J) shivam/- U T