Patna High Court
Rakesh SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted as the statutory presumption against the accused in dowry death cases and the framing of charges justified the rejection of the bail application.
Summary
The petitioner, Rakesh Sah, applied for regular bail in a criminal case registered under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, alleging that he was falsely implicated in the death of his wife, who was allegedly strangulated for not providing a dowry motorcycle. The petitioner claimed a clean antecedent and argued that the informant was not an eyewitness and that the allegations were vague and omnibus. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the statutory presumption against the accused in dowry death cases and pointing to the medical finding of asphyxia due to throttling. The court noted that charges had been framed, indicating that the trial had commenced. After considering the submissions, the court was not inclined to grant bail and consequently rejected the regular bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a dowry death case under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the statutory presumption against the accused in dowry death cases applies to bar bail
- Whether the framing of charges indicates that the trial has commenced, justifying denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 3(5), 80
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- presumption against accused
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- regular bail application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16895 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-2025 Thana- PAKRIDAYAL District- East Champaran
======================================================
Rakesh Sah S/O Akshaylal Sah @ Achchelal Sah Resident of Village -
Eakauna, Akauna, Chorma, Ward No. 06, P.S. - Pakridayal, District - East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhurendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 80, and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is in custody
since 20.05.2025 and the informant alleges that his daughter
was married to petitioner on 29-5-2023, further on 19-5-2025 at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16895 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
2/3
12 midnight the petitioner along with named accused persons
strangulated the victim to death for not giving motorcycle in
dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that
allegation of demand of dowry and torture is general and
omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that informant is not
an eyewitness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges
around suspicion and family members of the petitioner also
came to be implicated.
5. The learned APP for the State opposes the regular
bail application of the petitioner and submits that daughter of
the informant was married to the petitioner on 29.05.2023 and
the victim died within seven years of marriage, as such,
presumption in law is against the petitioner. It is further
submitted that from perusal of the order impugned, it would
manifest that the same records the cause of death as asphyxia
due to throttling, it is thus submitted that it appears that the
victim was strangulated to death.
6. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16895 of 2026(2) dt.06-05-2026
3/3
behalf of the petitioner submits that charges against the
petitioner stand framed, on which the learned APP submits that
if charges have been framed that amply demonstrates that trial
has commenced.
7. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
8. Accordingly, the instant regular bail application
stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…