Mahendra Sada v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48870 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2024 Thana- PIPRA District- Supaul ====================================================== Mahendra Sada S/O Bindeshwari Sada Resident of Village- Pathra, Ward No. 02, P.S.- Pipra, District- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Patla Kumari For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 11-08-2025

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Pipra Police Station Case No. 27 of 2024, dated 17.01.2024, disclosing offences under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the informant solemnized marriage of his daughter, namely, Lalo Kumari, with Kumod Sada about one year ago. On 17.01.2024, the informant received information that on the previous night his daughter has been killed by her husband and father-in-law. When the informant and other family members reached at the matrimonial home of the informant's daughter, they found the door closed and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48870 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 2/3 no one was present there. Upon injury, the neighbours told them that the deceased has been killed by her husband and father-in-law i.e. the petitioner and her body, after burning, has been disposed in the canal behind their house.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is father-in-law of the deceased. He next submits the petitioner has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has been made accused due to village politics. The husband of the deceased is in judicial custody. He further submits that the deceased was suffering from several ailments before marriage itself and on 16.01.2025 she suddenly died and allegation that the petitioner has killed the deceased is false.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the materials available on record, including the impugned order and First Information Report.

6. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that within one year of marriage the deceased died in her matrimonial home. There is allegation of murder against the petitioner. Partly burned body of the informant's daughter was recovered from the canal. There is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48870 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 3/3 presumption against the petitioner under Sections 113-A and 113-B of the Evidence Act.

7. Considering the aforesaid and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner the privilege of anticipatory bail.

8. This bail application is, accordingly, rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ashwani/- U T