IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27577 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2026 Thana- Mathurapur District- Samastipur ====================================================== Bal Kishun Sahni @ Balkrishna Sahni S/O Late Aghnu Sahni R/o Village-Akbarpur, Ward no. 12, P.S.- Mathurapur, District- Samastipur (Age wrongly mentioned in FIR as 56 years) ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 18-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 238, 103, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. The case of the prosecution, based on the complaint petition, in short, is that the husband of the informant had gone for fishing and thereafter proceeded towards the house of the petitioner carrying a fishing net. It is further alleged that when the husband of the informant did not return home, he was being searched. It is alleged that on 16.10.2025, a dead body was found floating in the river near J.P. Central School. The Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27577 of 2026(3) dt.18-06-2026 2/3 complainant/informant identified the dead body as her husband. The informant claims that the petitioner had hatched a plan and has killed her husband.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that from perusal of the complaint petition, it will transpire that the complaint petition was filed on 06.12.2025 and much prior to that, the informant herself had filed a U.D. Case wherein she had stated that the dead body of her husband was found on 16.10.2025 in the river. He also submits that from perusal of the postmortem report, it will transpire that the cause of death is ante-mortem drowning. He also submits that the earlier version of the informant is that her husband’s dead body was found in the river, and this information was given to the police on 16.10.2025, whereas on 06.12.2025, the informant/complainant alleges that the petitioner along with others have killed her husband. The first version of the informant is completely contrary to the present case. Moreover, the post-mortem also falsifies the allegations. He further submits that as per the case of the prosecution, there are altogether four accused persons who have killed her Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27577 of 2026(3) dt.18-06-2026 3/3 husband. It has been submitted that the nature of the allegation is general and omnibus and no ante-mortem injuries were found in the post-mortem. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.03.2026.

5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Samastipur in connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27577 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-22 Year-2026 Thana- Mathurapur District- Samastipur ====================================================== Bal Kishun Sahni @ Balkrishna Sahni S/O Late Aghnu Sahni R/o Village-Akbarpur, Ward no. 12, P.S.- Mathurapur, District- Samastipur (Age wrongly mentioned in FIR as 56 years) ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 3 18-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 238, 103, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. The case of the prosecution, based on the complaint petition, in short, is that the husband of the informant had gone for fishing and thereafter proceeded towards the house of the petitioner carrying a fishing net. It is further alleged that when the husband of the informant did not return home, he was being searched. It is alleged that on 16.10.2025, a dead body was found floating in the river near J.P. Central School. The Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27577 of 2026(3) dt.18-06-2026 2/3 complainant/informant identified the dead body as her husband. The informant claims that the petitioner had hatched a plan and has killed her husband.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that from perusal of the complaint petition, it will transpire that the complaint petition was filed on 06.12.2025 and much prior to that, the informant herself had filed a U.D. Case wherein she had stated that the dead body of her husband was found on 16.10.2025 in the river. He also submits that from perusal of the postmortem report, it will transpire that the cause of death is ante-mortem drowning. He also submits that the earlier version of the informant is that her husband’s dead body was found in the river, and this information was given to the police on 16.10.2025, whereas on 06.12.2025, the informant/complainant alleges that the petitioner along with others have killed her husband. The first version of the informant is completely contrary to the present case. Moreover, the post-mortem also falsifies the allegations. He further submits that as per the case of the prosecution, there are altogether four accused persons who have killed her Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27577 of 2026(3) dt.18-06-2026 3/3 husband. It has been submitted that the nature of the allegation is general and omnibus and no ante-mortem injuries were found in the post-mortem. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.03.2026.

5. The application for bail is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the informant and the learned APP for the State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Samastipur in connection with Mathurapur P.S. Case No. 22 of 2026. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T