CR. MISC./34836/2026 of Amarjeet @ Amit Kumar @ Amarjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar on 18 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

18-08-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 80/3(5) of the BNS and ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the sister of the informant was married with the petitioner on 09.05.2022. The informant has alleged that his sister was kept in good manner for 7-8 months by her in-laws and thereafter her husband and her in-laws started demanding Rs.10 lakh for expansion of their business and her sister was assaulted, abused and tortured on account of this demand. She was also being threatened with life. The informant has further alleged that he and his family members were told by his sister about this incident. On 24.05.2024 at about 10:00 am, he received information on his mobile phone by his sister that she was being brutally assaulted by her in-laws who had been threatening her that she would be killed. On the same date, later on at about 05:00-06:00 pm, he received a call from the mother-in-law and the sister-in-law of his sister who told him that his sister had died. The informant reached the matrimonial home of his sister and found her dead body lying on the bed and petitioner and other coaccused persons were found absconding and only the elder sister-in-law of his sister and her two children were present there.

4. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. There has been no dowry demand and for this reason there has been no complaint since the date of marriage till the date of death of the sister of the informant. Learned senior counsel further submits that the post mortem was conducted on the dead body but no external injury was found except for a ligature mark and this falsifies the allegation made by the informant that his sister was being brutally assaulted. It is also very surprising that the sister of the informant was being brutally assaulted and he chose not to go to her matrimonial home and continued with his usual work. Learned senior counsel further submits that true fact of the case is that there was some hot talk between the informant and his sister relating to ancestral property and in frustration, the deceased committed suicide and in order to take advantage of the incident, the informant has filed this false case against the petitioner and his relatives. Learned senior counsel further submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner for demanding dowry or torturing the sister of the informant. The petitioner is a businessman and has been running a number of furniture showrooms in Patna and he has no need of money to expand his business. Learned senior counsel further submits that in the FIR, the informant had alleged that he had given a Scorpio vehicle in dowry to the petitioner but the said vehicle was purchased by the father of the petitioner on loan and the EMI of the said vehicle is being paid by the father of the informant. Learned senior counsel further submits that there was harmonious and cordial relationship between the petitioner and the informant’s sister and both shared good marital relationship and there was no demand of dowry. As the couple had no child, the deceased used to be in mental distress and she further used to remain emotionally disturbed. Learned senior counsel further submits that some of independent witnesses namely Md. Asif and Md. Azhar who went to install an air conditioner in the house of the petitioner clearly stated that while they were there, the sister of the petitioner came crying and when they went downstairs, they found a lady hanging. The coaccused brother of the petitioner pulled up the body and the mother-in-law of the said lady tried to cut the rope by her teeth. This clearly shows the sister of the informant committed suicide. The learned senior counsel also submits that the informant has been pressurizing the police for doing investigation as per his wishes and this fact was also taken note of by the Investigating Officer. Learned senior counsel next submits that the petitioner is having one antecedent and he is in custody since 15.07.2025. Charges have been framed against the petitioner.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner and other co-accused persons have been ill-treating the deceased sister of the informant and witnesses who are not family members but have been knowing the family have stated that the petitioner used to ill-treat the sister of the informant and always used to taunt her with comments. The petitioner claims that he was not present at the spot but the mobile location of the petitioner was found at the place of occurrence till 04:00 pm on the alleged date of occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner managed the witnesses and surrendered only after their favorable statements were recorded. These witnesses have earlier stated about the quarrel between the petitioner and the deceased but subsequently they resiled from their statements. Learned counsel further submits that the death has occurred within seven years of marriage and there is statutory presumption under Section 118 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 and it is to be presumed that the petitioner caused the dowry death on his wife and in this regard, learned counsel relied itself on decision of Mahesh Chand Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 452 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court further observed that the Court should not be lenient in dealing with the serious crimes against women and directed for completion of trial within a year from the date of the order.

6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the absence of any complaint from the date of marriage till the date of death of the sister of the informant and further finding lack of substantive material showing demand of dowry and also considering absence of injuries as alleged and further considering the possibility of false accusation, submission of charge sheet and period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-8, Patna/concerned court, in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial court.

(iii) In case of absence on three 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.

7. It is made clear that the observations made hereinabove are for the purpose of consideration of prayer for bail and will not cause prejudice to any of the parties.

8. Learned trial court is further directed to expedite the trial in connection with Beur P.S. Case No. 263 of 2025 and conclude the same, at the earliest.

Anuradha/- (Arun Kumar Jha, J) U T