Patna High Court
Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra Kumar SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail is not warranted and rejected the petitioner's application.
Summary
Dharmendra Kumar Sah was named in an FIR under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for the alleged dowry‑related death of his wife. He applied for anticipatory bail, asserting that the marriage was solemnised in 2017, the FIR is fabricated, and the post‑mortem report indicates poisoning rather than murder. The State opposed the bail, contending that despite the elapsed time, the petitioner remains the husband of the deceased and therefore a material suspect. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court refused to grant anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender within six weeks. The Court further directed the trial court to consider his surrender‑cum‑bail application on the merits without prejudice to the rejection of anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in a dowry‑death case.
- Whether the lapse of time since marriage affects the applicability of the dowry‑death provisions.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of absconding or tampering with evidence warranting denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 103(1)
- Section 3(5)
- surrender
- post‑mortem report
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13593 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-147 Year-2025 Thana- DAUDPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Dharmendra Sah @ Dharmendra Kumar Sah S/o Daroga Sah Resident of
Village- Soniya , P.S.- Daudpur, District- Saran Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajendra Nath Ojha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anish Chandra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
3 29-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Daudpur P.S. Case No. 147 of 2025, dated 13.06.2025,
lodged under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”), pending
before the Court of Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
three named accused persons, including the present petitioner,
with the allegation that the informant’s daughter has been killed
due to dowry demand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel
further submits that the marriage was admittedly solemnized in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13593 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
the year 2017, and the present case has been instituted in the
year 2025. Counsel further submits that the allegations made in
the FIR are absolutely false and fabricated, and the only adverse
aspect is that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased.
5. Counsel also submits that on the previous occasion,
the case diary and post-mortem report had been called for, and
the post-mortem report indicates that it is not a case of murder
but a case of poisoning due to frustration. Counsel further
submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and has been
unnecessarily made an accused in the case.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioner and submits that it is true that it is not a
case of dowry death, as the marriage was solemnized about
seven years ago. However, the petitioner is the husband of the
deceased.
7. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is
not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is
hereby rejected.
8. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner to
surrender before the Trial Court within a period of six weeks
from today. In case the petitioner surrenders within the said
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13593 of 2026(3) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
period, the Trial Court is directed to consider his bail application
after going through the case diary minutely and the post-mortem
report, and to pass orders on his surrender-cum-bail application
on the same day, without being prejudiced by the fact that the
anticipatory bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this
Court. The Trial Court shall pass order on the merits of the case.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…