Ghanshyam Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50248 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2019 Thana- SONO District- Jamui ====================================================== Ghanshyam Yadav Son of Madhusudan Yadav Resident of Village- Bhelwa Mohanpur, P.S.- Sono, District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B0/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter was married to Bhagirath Yadav about four years ago and after marriage, the accused persons including the petitioner were demanding dowry and were torturing her. Further, on 18.11.20219 at 8.00 P.M., the accused persons including the petitioner assaulted her daughter and sprinkling kerosene oil and set her ablaze, on which she got badly injured and thereafter she was taken to a private hospital
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50248 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 2/3 at Jamui and from there she was referred to PMCH Patna where during the course of treatment she died.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 21.05.2025. It is next submitted that husband of the petitioner had approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.21141 of 2022 and the same was allowed by an order dated 06.01.2023 as the husband was in custody since 20.07.2021. It is next submitted that petitioner is brother in-law of the deceased and informant is not an eye witness. It is further submitted that it was husband who had taken the deceased to the hospital for treatment where she died after nearly seven days of the occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.
6. Considering the submission and taking into consideration the order dated 06.01.2023 in Cr. Misc. No.21141 of 2022, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Sono P. S. Case No.351 of 2019.
7. The application stands allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50248 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 3/3
8. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying the delay the trial in any manner, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording reasons.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T