Patna High Court
Santi DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The Court held that there was no real apprehension of arrest and therefore dismissed the anticipatory bail petition.
Summary
The petitioners, who are the mother‑in‑law, father‑in‑law, brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law of a woman who died under suspicious circumstances, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 80(2) read with 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the deceased had complained of torture and financial demands before she allegedly hanged herself, but the petitioners were not named in the FIR and no investigation linked them to the offence. The petitioners argued that they faced a real apprehension of arrest despite the lack of any allegation against them. The State contended that without any charge or investigation, there was no basis for anticipatory bail. The High Court observed that the petitioners had no material indicating a genuine fear of arrest and that the trial court’s rejection of anticipatory bail was unfounded. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition as premature, directing the petitioners to approach the appropriate forum if a real apprehension later arises.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners have a real apprehension of arrest justifying anticipatory bail under Section 80(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the anticipatory bail application in the absence of any allegation against the petitioners.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 80
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- arrest apprehension
- preliminary disposal
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30295 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2026 Thana- DIGHA District- Patna
======================================================
1. Santi Devi wife of Ajay Prasad Gupta @ Ajay Sao Resident of Village
-Khajuri PS -Digha Distt -Patna
2. Ajay Sao Son of Late Dhunki Sao Resident of Village -Khajuri PS -Digha
Distt -Patna
3. Santosh Kumar son of Ajay Prasad Gupta @ Ajay Sao Resident of Village
-Khajuri PS -Digha Distt -Patna
4. Poonam Kumari Daughter of Ajay Prasad Gupta @ Ajay Sao Resident of
Village -Khajuri PS -Digha Distt -Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate
Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
02. In the present case, the petitioners are
apprehending their arrest in connection with Digha P.S. Case
No. 36 of 2026 registered for the alleged offence under Sections
80(2) r/w 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
03. As per prosecution case, daughter of the informant
was married with the co-accused Vijay Soni on 16.07.2021. She
died in her matrimonial home on 12.01.2026. The daughter of
the informant used to make complaint against the co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30295 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/3
husband and her sister-in-law as they had been torturing her and
there was demand of money. Lastly, the informant received
information that her daughter hanged herself in her matrimonial
home. The petitioners are in-laws of the deceased daughter of
the informant.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the deceased had been suffering form some mental ailments and
she had been under continuous treatment. The petitioner no. 1 is
mother-in-law, petitioner no. 2 is father-in-law, petitioner no.3 is
brother-in-law and petitioner no. 4 is sister-in-law, respectively,
of the deceased. Learned counsel further submits that there is no
allegation against the petitioner in the FIR and nothing has come
up during investigation against these petitioners. The petitioners
are having clean antecedent.
05. Learned APP opposes the submission made on
behalf of the petitioners. Learned APP for the State submits that
if the petitioners are not named in the FIR and nothing came up
against the petitioners during investigation, there is no
apprehension of arrest for the petitioners.
06. Perused the record.
07. I find it strange that petitioners have approached
this Court in this manner at the stage when the petitioners have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30295 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/3
neither been named in the FIR and nothing came up against
them during investigation. Therefore, there is no apprehension
of arrest. The rejection of the prayer for anticipatory bail by the
learned trial court considering the nature of offence and
relationship of the petitioners with the deceased without any
material being placed on record is beyond comprehension. At
this stage, I do not find any real apprehension of arrest of the
petitioners and, therefore, approaching this Court at this stage
by the petitioners is premature.
08. Accordingly, finding no useful purpose in
continuing with the present petition, the same is disposed of.
09. If any real apprehension arises, the petitioners are
at liberty to have recourse of law in appropriate proceeding
before appropriate forum.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Ashish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.