Rajendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85221 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2024 Thana- JALALPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Rajendra Mahto S/o Krishna Mahto R/o Village - Vishunpura, P.S - Jalalpur, District - Saran at Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jalalpur P.S. Case No. 252 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Section 80 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3.

Prosecution case in short is that daughter of the informant has been done to death at her matrimonial house by her in-laws due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry. 4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 24.02.2025. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85221 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026 2/3 5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. There is no specific allegation attributed to the petitioner, rather allegation is general and omnibus in nature. Postmortem report suggest the cause of death due could not be ascertained and viscera report is preserved.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is fervently submitted that petitioner, being the husband of the deceased, bears the onus of explaining the circumstances leading to her death.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that petitioner, being the husband of the deceased, bears the onus of explaining the circumstances leading to her death, this Court is not inclined to grant bail at this stage. Prayer for bail is hereby rejected. 8.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

9.

However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85221 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026 3/3 months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T