← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./83947/2025bail granted

Suresh Kewat v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-13Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83947 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-821 Year-2022 Thana- BAGHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Suresh Kewat Son of Late Alha Kevat @ Alha Kewat Resident of VillageNarainpur, Wad No. 10, P.S.- Pathakhaulia O.P., District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Milind Kumar Mishra, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

2. This is the second regular bail application of the petitioner. Earlier, the regular bail application of the petitioner was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 78758/2024.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 803/2023 C.I.S. No. 247 of 2023 arising out of Bagaha P.S. Case No. 821 of 2022 dated 25.11.2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the B.N.S. Act.

4. Allegation upon the petitioner is that he along with other named accused persons were demanding Rs. 25,000/- dowry and due to the delay in giving the same the petitioner

2/4 along with others had strangulated the daughter of the informant to death.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated as an afterthought. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the wife of the petitioner died due to some disease which could be ascertained by the inquest report in which it is stated that the cause of death occurred due to some disease. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in custody since 28.11.2022 and till date one prosecution witness has been examined.

6. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and stated that the wife of the petitioner was done to death within four days of the marriage at the house of the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid submission and taking into account the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 28.11.2022 and only one prosecution witness has been examined and the learned trial court has sent a report stating that the most of the private witnesses are resident of Uttar Pradesh and the Court is facing difficulty in concluding the trial expeditiously and it has also been reported that out of total 9 charge-sheet

3/4 witnesses only one that is the doctor who has been examined so far, in view of the above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (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 S. Tr. No. 803/2023 C.I.S. No. 247 of 2023 arising out of Bagaha P.S. Case No. 821 of 2022, subject to the following terms and conditions :- (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.

(iii) In case of absence on two 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. (iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in

4/4 the name of verification.

8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

9. The application stands allowed.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Gautam/- U T