Patna High Court
Pushpa DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Pushpa Devi, applied for bail after being implicated in a dowry‑death case (P.S. Case No. 686 of 2022) under Section 304B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the co‑accused demanded dowry and killed the informant’s daughter, and the petitioner’s name surfaced only after the informant’s statement was restated. The petitioner’s counsel argued that she was never named in the original FIR, has a clean record, and there is no material linking her to the crime. The State opposed the bail, citing a prior order rejecting anticipatory bail for a co‑accused in a related matter. Considering the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s gender, and that the husband of the deceased is already in custody, the court granted bail with a cash bond and surety conditions, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and attendance requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a Section 304B IPC case where she was not originally named in the FIR.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner are sufficient to deny bail under the circumstances.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- Section 304B IPC
- bail conditions
- gender considerations
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19281 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-686 Year-2022 Thana- BARHARA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Pushpa Devi W/o Santosh Kumar, R/o Village- Kolahrampur, Panchrukhiya,
Ward No. 11, P.S- Barahara, Distt.- Bhojpur (Ara).
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Harendra Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner is
apprehending her arrest in connection with Barahara (Bhojpur)
P.S. Case No. 686 of 2022, dated 24.09.2022, registered for the
offence punishable under Section 304B read with Section 34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, the daughter of the
informant was married with co-accused Sanoj Rai @ Saroj Rai
@ Pappu in the year 2019. The allegation against the co-accused
persons is that they have been demanding a piece of land in
dowry and on non-fulfillment of this demand, killed the
daughter of the informant. The name of the petitioner surfaced
in this case during investigation for also being involved in the
said occurrence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19281 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in
this case. The petitioner was not initially named in the FIR, but
after the restatement of the informant was recorded, she named
this petitioner as well. The petitioner is wife of the elder brother
of the husband of the deceased and has been living separately
for quite some time. Learned counsel further submits that there
are two children out of the marriage of the informant’s son-in-
law and the daughter of the informant and it is not believable
that her daughter was tortured and killed on account of demand
of dowry. Learned counsel next submits that there is no material
on record to show the involvement of the petitioner in the
present case, who is having clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposes the submissions made on
behalf of the petitioner and submits that the anticipatory bail
application of the co-accused, Mohan Rai @ Mohan Kumar, has
been rejected by a learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide
order dated 24.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 7946 of 2023.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances
and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering
the fact that the petitioner is a lady, who was not
initially named, and the allegations are general and
omnibus against her and further considering the fact that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19281 of 2026(2) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
husband of the deceased is already in custody, let the petitioner,
above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the
Court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be
released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Arrah (Bhojpur), in connection with Barahara
(Bhojpur) P.S. Case No. 686 of 2022, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. 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.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Shahnawaz/-
U T
Checking your session…