Patna High Court
Seema DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court refused to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Seema Devi, sought anticipatory bail in a case where she was alleged to have participated in the murder of an informant's daughter over a dowry dispute. The charge sheet invoked Sections 80 and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita. The State and the informant opposed bail, noting that processes under Sections 84 and 85 of the same statute had already been issued against the petitioner, marking her as an absconder. The court examined the record and considered the seriousness of the allegations and the existence of prior processes. Concluding that the issuance of Sections 84 and 85 processes indicated a likelihood of the petitioner evading trial, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when processes under Sections 84 and 85 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita have been issued against the applicant
- Whether the allegations under Sections 80 and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita justify denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 238, 80, 84, 85
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- murder
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 80
- Section 84
- Section 85
- Section 238
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23554 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Seema Devi Wife of Rajesh Sahni RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - DIPAU
PAKARI P.S - MOHAMMADPUR, GOPALGANJ, BIHAR
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
Mr. Md. Farooq, Advocate
Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application for anticipatory bail arises out
of Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025 for the offence
punishable under Sections 80 and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita.
3. As per the allegation, the petitioner along with
co-accused persons murdered the daughter of the informant for
non-fulfillment of the dowry demand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that the petitioner is sister-in-law of the deceased and there is
general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The
husband of the petitioner is in custody and no presumption
would be drawn against her as she is herself a daughter-in-law
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23554 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/2
of the family.
5. Learned counsel for the State and the learned
counsel for the informant opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail
of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has
submitted that the petitioner has been declared as an absconder
and processes under Sections 84 and 85 of the BNSS have been
issued against her on 21.07.2025 and 22.08.2025 respectively.
6. Heard the parties and perused the record.
Considering the fact that 84 and 85 of the BNSS processes have
been issued against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to
grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the same is
accordingly rejected.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…