Ajit Kumar @ Ajit Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30311 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-762 Year-2025 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Ajit Kumar @ Ajit Yadav S/o Mithlesh Yadav, R/o Vill.- Moratal, P.S.- Bodhgaya, Dist.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 11-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case No. 762 of 2025, dated 05.11.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80 and 123 read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, wife of the petitioner died in her matrimonial home within two years of her marriage and allegation against this petitioner is that he along with other co-accused persons administered her poison causing her death, on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. From the FIR it is clear that petitioner and his family members took the daughter of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30311 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026 2/3 informant to hospital for treatment after she consumed poison, however she died later and informant was also informed about this fact. Learned counsel further submits that the doctor conducting the post-mortem of the deceased stated that no external mechanical injury was found on the dead body. The true facts of the case are that petitioner had been facing severe financial problems and deceased sought help from the informant, but the informant did not provide any such help to the deceased and in a state of helplessness, she consumed poison. She was taken to the hospital by the petitioner and the informant after communication came there and even participated in the cremation and the last rites processes that were held on 05.11.2025.
Thereafter, after recording of the fardebeyan on 23.10.2025, FIR was lodged on 05.11.2025 without any explanation. Learned counsel further submits that petitioner has lost his wife and his son is just an infant who has lost his mother and also the company of his father who is in custody since 15.11.2025. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner is having one antecedent in which he is on bail and chargesheet has been submitted.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30311 of 2026(2) dt.11-05-2026 3/3 submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the submission of chargesheet and period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya / concerned Court, in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case No. 762 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. 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 petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) Shahnawaz/- U T