logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide
24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 SC 459 print Preview print Next print
Court : Supreme Court of India
Case No : Criminal Appeal No. of 2026 [@ SLP [Crl.] No. 1678 of 2026]
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NONGMEIKAPAM KOTISWAR SINGH
Parties : Dheeraj Jha @ Dheeraj Kumar @ Raghav Versus The State of Bihar
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: ----- For the Respondent: ----
Date of Judgment : 25-03-2026
Head Note :-
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 328, 376(D) and 34 -
Summary :-
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules Mentioned:
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC')
- Section 302
- Section 328
- Section 376(D)
- Section 34
- Section 306

2. Catch Words:
- Bail
- Appeal

3. Summary:
The appellant sought bail for offences originally listed under Sections 302, 328, 376(D) and 34 of the IPC, but was ultimately charge‑sheeted only under Section 306 IPC. The appellant, who was the superior of the deceased, argued that the elements of Section 306 were not established and that the death was a suicide linked to an alleged extra‑marital affair. After hearing counsel, the court noted the time already spent in custody and the case facts, and decided to grant bail with conditions satisfactory to the trial court. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, bail was granted, and the appeal was allowed.

4. Conclusion:
Appeal Allowed
Judgment :-

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant seeks bail in connection with FIR No.114/2023, dated 01.07.2023, registered at Police Station-Industrial, Sub-Division-Sadar, District-Bhagalpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 328, 376(D) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC'). Though the FIR was registered under the aforesaid sections, upon completion of investigation the appellant was chargesheeted only for the offence punishable under Section 306 of the IPC and not other offences.

3. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. The appellant was the superior of the deceased.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the ingredients of the offence under Section 306 of the IPC are not made out and in any case, the deceased committed suicide pursuant to an alleged extra-marital affair with the appellant.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made, we are inclined to grant bail to the appellant, particularly, by taking note of the period of incarceration already undergone by the appellant and the facts governing the case.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appellant is granted bail on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the concerned Trial Court.

8. The appeal stands allowed, accordingly.

9. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
 
  CDJLawJournal