Patna High Court
Moti SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The Court allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Moti Sah and Dhurpati Devi, who are the uncle‑in‑law and aunt‑in‑law of an informant, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a criminal case (Chanpatiya PS Case No.185 of 2025) that alleges offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 69, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. The informant’s narrative involves a forced marriage, the suicide of her husband, alleged torture by the deceased’s parents, a subsequent relationship with her brother‑in‑law, and dowry‑related harassment, but no specific allegation is made against the petitioners. The petitioners contend they have no criminal antecedent and that the father‑in‑law and mother‑in‑law have already been granted anticipatory bail. The State and the informant opposed the bail, arguing the petitioners might be implicated. The Court, after considering the facts, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to a bail‑bond of Rs 10,000 each, two sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners in view of the allegations under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the petitioners are likely to be implicated in the offences alleged in Case No.185 of 2025.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 482(2), 69, 85
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- dowry harassment
- domestic violence
- West Champaran
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19967 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Moti Sah S/o Late Bhagelu Sah R/o Village- Chuhari, P.S.- Chanpatiya,
Dist.- West champaran
2. Dhurpati Devi @ Dhurupati Devi @ Dhruvpato Devi W/o Moti Shah R/o
Village- Chuhari, P.S.- Chanpatiya, Dist.- West champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP
For the Informant/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a
case in connection with Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 185 of 2025
dated 05.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 69, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the prosecution case, the marriage of the
informant was performed with co-accused Manish Kumar in the
year 2023, thereafter Manish Kumar died. It is alleged that
mother and father of Manish Kumar always used to tease her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19967 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/3
husband, as a result of which he committed suicide. Thereafter,
the parents of Manish Kumar used to torture the informant and
was threatening that if any case is lodged all of them would be
in trouble and were putting pressure and they assured to get her
marriage performed with her brother-in-law Amrit Raj Anand,
her brother-in-law also established physical relationship,
thereafter a daughter was born on 30.06.2025. Since several
months, the child was with her father-in-law and mother-in-law
and thereafter the behaviour of the brother-in-law became
evasive and she is not aware that where her mother-in-law and
father-in-law has kept her child and the father-in-law and
mother-in-law has started saying that the child is theirs and
unless she gives dowry she would be ousted from the house.
The mother-in-law of the informant has even gone to the extent
of saying the informant as a witch.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that petitioners happens to be uncle-in-law and aunt-in-law of
the informant and there is absolutely no allegation against the
petitioners. Moreover, it has been submitted, at the bar, that
father-in-law and mother-in-law of the informant have been
granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate
Bench of this Court by order dated 07.04.2026 passed in Cr.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19967 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/3
Misc. No. 16722 of 2026. It has further been submitted that
petitioners have got no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their
arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be
enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court
concerned, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with
Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 185 of 2025, subject to conditions as
laid down under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…