Santosh Das v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20243 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- Kinjar District- Arwal ====================================================== Santosh Das, S/o Vilash Das, Resident of Village- Bajitpur Mela, PS- Kinjar, District- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nawal Kishore Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Kinjar P.S. Case no.121 of 2025 registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that his daughter who was married to the petitioner herein was killed by the accused persons including the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case only for the reason that he happens to be the husband of the deceased. The daughter of the informant committed suicide over a trivial dispute and as has transpired in paragraph no.12 of the case diary, even the rope used has been recovered. There is an unexplained delay in lodging of the F.I.R. No independent

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20243 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 2/2 witness has supported the prosecution case. The petitioner and the deceased have five minor children out of the said wedlock. The petitioner is in custody since 1.12.2025 and has no criminal antecedent.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State who submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner who happens to be the husband of the deceased that he along with others committed the murder of the informant's daughter. It is further submitted that in course of investigation it has transpired that the cause of death is due to throttling.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the F.I.R., the petitioner being the husband of the deceased, the material that has transpired in course of investigation and especially the cause of death as has transpired in the postmortem report stating the same to have been caused as a result of throttling, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T