Pappu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35487 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2026 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Pappu Yadav S/O Latru Yadav R/O Village- Pipratanr Baribagh, P.S- Khaira, Distt.- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 21-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No. 92 of 2026 lodged on 06.03.2026 under Sections 108, 238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against five named accused persons, including the present petitioner. The allegation in the FIR is that the informant received information from the petitioner regarding the death of his daughter. On receiving such information, the informant's son immediately rushed to the matrimonial home of the deceased and found her lying dead on a bed. It is alleged that thereafter the accused persons, along with some unknown villagers, removed the dead body and subsequently informed the police.
2/4 However, when the police reached the place of occurrence, the dead body could not be found. Subsequently, when the informant himself reached the matrimonial home of his daughter, he came to know that before death, in the morning between the daughter of the informant and her sister -in-law some quarrel happened and due to torture by her matrimonial family members, she had committed suicide. It is further alleged that, with a view to causing disappearance of evidence, the accused persons removed the dead body of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the unfortunate husband of the deceased. He submits that it is not a case of murder but one of suicide arising out of a matrimonial dispute between the husband and wife. It is further submitted that the deceased has left behind two minor sons, one of whom is residing with the petitioner's father. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of investigation, the informant himself has realized the true facts and has filed a compromise petition/affidavit stating that no one is responsible for the occurrence and that the case was instituted due to misunderstanding, which has been brought on record as Annexure-P/2. It is also submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 06.03.2026 and that the investigation has
3/4 already concluded with submission of the charge-sheet.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail. However, he fairly submits that, as per the post-mortem report, the cause of death has not been ascertained and the final opinion has been reserved awaiting the viscera report. He further submits that the post-mortem report does not disclose any external injury on the body of the deceased. It is also submitted that from the case diary it transpires that there existed matrimonial discord between the petitioner and the deceased.
6. Having considered the rival submissions and on perusal of the case diary, particularly the fact that the postmortem report does not disclose any external injury on the body of the deceased, the cause of death has been kept reserved awaiting the viscera report, the case diary indicates that there existed matrimonial discord between the husband and wife, the petitioner has remained in custody since 06.03.2026, chargesheet has already been submitted and the investigation stands concluded, this Court is of the view that no purpose shall be served keeping the petitioner behind the judicial custody.
7. In the present facts and circumstances of this case, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) as
4/4 mentioned in Section 2(1) (d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamui, in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No. 92 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 480(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Manshi/Ashwini U T