Rohit Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22583 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-432 Year-2025 Thana- HISUWA District- Nawada ====================================================== Rohit Sharma, Son of Suman Thakur @ Suman Sharma, Resident of VillageDhanwa, P.S.- Hisua, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra, Advocate For the State :

Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 646/2025, arising out of Hisua P.S. Case No. 432/2025, registered for the offence under Sections 80(2), 3(5) of BNS.

3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant was married with the petitioner on 11.05.2025. The informant has alleged that the petitioner and his family members used to demand motorcycle, fridge etc. in dowry. As the informant could not fulfill the demand, the petitioner told the informant on 24.07.2025 that something untoward would

2/5 happen to his daughter, if the demands were not made. When the informant reached the matrimonial home of his daughter, he found her dead.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner and his family members have been made accused in this case with general and omnibus allegations without any specific details. The daughter of the informant committed suicide over a minor issue as the petitioner refused to take her to her parental home, she hanged herself and committed suicide. This fact is corroborated from the post mortem report, which shows no external injury was found on the deceased except ligature mark in 'V' shaped of size. These facts go on to show that the deceased committed suicide.

The allegation against the petitioner and other coaccused persons have not been supported by any of the persons from the place of occurrence and the witnesses, who supported the prosecution case, are all the family members of the deceased. The learned counsel further submits that it was the petitioner, who gave information to the informant, but the informant has made a different story and implicated all the family members of the petitioner in this case.

3/5 his family members would have caused the death of the daughter of the informant, they would not have remained present in the house from where all of them were arrested in a single day. The learned counsel further submits that the coaccused Pooja Kumari and Kaili Devi have been granted bail by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.84329/2025. Another coaccused Barfi Devi, mother in-law of the deceased, has also been granted bail by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 23.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.11111/2026. The learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is in custody since 25.07.2025 and is having clean antecedents. The charge sheet has been submitted.

5. Learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased and the death occurred just after one year of marriage in the matrimonial home of the deceased. Therefore, presumption would be against the petitioner for causing dowry death.

6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and

4/5 submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the absence of specific details regarding demand of dowry and further considering the conduct of the petitioner and his family members and also considering the submission of charge sheet against the petitioner, his period of custody and clean antecedent, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-IX, Nawada/court concerned, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 646/2025, arising out of Hisua P.S. Case No. 432 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial court.

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the

5/5 petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T