Patna High Court
Sakshi Devi @ Sakshi KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that in the absence of specific allegations against the petitioner and considering her clean antecedent, bail could be granted under the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, subject to conditions.
Summary
Sakshi Devi was arrested on 10 March 2026 in connection with a murder alleged to be motivated by dowry demands, under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution claimed she and her family killed the victim’s daughter for dowry, while the petitioner argued she had a clean antecedent and the FIR contained only a generic allegation against all accused, with no specific charge against her. She sought bail, contending that the lack of direct evidence and her non‑involvement warranted release. The court examined the FIR, the petitioner’s antecedents, and the statutory provisions, and concluded that bail could be granted with appropriate safeguards. Accordingly, the court ordered her release on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 in the present circumstances.
- Whether the generic allegations in the FIR constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent and lack of specific accusation merit the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80(2)
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- murder
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- Section 80
- Section 3
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29635 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2026 Thana- Panapur District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Sakshi Devi @ Sakshi Kumari W/o Tishu Thakur @ Sudhanshu Kumar R/o
Village-Bakatpur, PS- Panapur Kariyat, District- Muzaffarpur, A/P P-103,
AWHO Colony, Gajendra Vihar, Shisambara, Singhwala, PS- Sahaspur
District- Dehradun, Uttarakhand
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Nandlal Pandey S/o Late Arjun Pandey R/o Village- Mausaha, PS- Panapur
Kariyat, District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate
: Mr. Madhukar Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 05-05-2026 Supplementary Affidavit filed on behalf of the
petitioner is kept on record.
2. Heard Mr. P.N. Shahi, learned senior counsel for
the petitioner as well as Mr. Dilip Kumar No. 1, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
3. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
10.03.2026 in connection with Panapur Kariyat P.S. Case No. 35
of 2026, F.I.R. dated 09.03.2026 for the offences punishable
under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita,
2023.
4. According to prosecution case, the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29635 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
2/3
alleged that the petitioner and his family members murdered his
daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been
implicated in the present case merely on the ground that she is
the married sister-in-law of the deceased. Although the
petitioner is named in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR
it appears that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt
act or demand of dowry against her rather there is general and
omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the
petitioner. He next submits that marriage of the petitioner was
solemnized way back on 24.06.2012, and since then she does
not have much concern with her parental family and husband of
the deceased, namely, Aakash Kumar @ Ranu is in judicial
custody since 10.03.2026 and the petitioner is in custody since
10.03.2026.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29635 of 2026(3) dt.05-05-2026
3/3
Magistrate, First Class, Court No.-V, Muzaffarpur(West) in
connection with Panapur Kariyat P.S. Case No. 35 of 2026,
subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…