Harsh Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87698 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-243 Year-2025 Thana- KHAJEKALA District- Patna ====================================================== Harsh Kumar Yadav, aged about 28 years, Male, S/o Prakash Chandr Yadav, R/o Gurhatta Umashankar Gali, PS- Khajekala, (Patna City), Distt- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pintu Kumar Patel, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Narsingh Tanti, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Kaushal Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant, who has appeared suo motu.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Khajekala PS Case No.243 of 2025 dated 16.06.2025, instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other accused persons have committed the murder of the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. The petitioner is the husband of the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. The deceased was an
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87698 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/3 ill tempered lady and she herself has committed suicide. The petitioner has no role in the incident. Further submission is that the petitioner is a government employee and there is no occasion for him either to demand money or anything else from the parents of the deceased. The allegation of demand of money is completely false and fabricated. The petitioner is in custody since 17.06.2025 and two cases are pending against him.
5. Learned APP as well as learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the informant submits that earlier also money was demanded by the petitioner and his family members which was fulfilled by the father of the deceased. The informant had earlier paid rupees five lakhs in cash to the petitioner and thereafter also, he paid the money to the petitioner several times through UPI. It is also submitted that at the time of marriage also rupees nine lakhs and odd was given to the petitioner. The petitioner has killed his wife due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner for bail is rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87698 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 3/3
8. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and take all endeavour to conclude the same as early as possible, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
9. The application stands dismissed.
(Khatim Reza, J) J. Alam/- U T