Patna High Court
Rameshwar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that, since no specific charge was made against the petitioner and co‑accused had already been granted bail, anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Rameshwar Sharma, father‑in‑law of a woman who allegedly died due to dowry‑related torture, filed an application for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.S. 2023. He contended that no specific allegation was made against him, that the cause of death was asphyxia by hanging, and that he lived separately from the deceased. The State opposed the bail but acknowledged that the husband and other accused had already been granted anticipatory bail by the trial court. The High Court, noting the absence of any direct charge against the petitioner and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, exercised its power under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 to grant anticipatory bail with standard conditions. The order directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and comply with conditions regarding court appearances, non‑tampering with witnesses, and refraining from further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 in the absence of specific allegations against him.
- Whether the petitioner is implicated in the alleged dowry‑related death under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.S. 2023.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S., 2023 — s. 3(5), 482(2), 80
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- Section 80
- Section 3(5)
- Section 482
- B.N.S.S. 2023
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3778 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-186 Year-2025 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran
======================================================
Rameshwar Sharma S/o Late Bhikhari Thakur @ Late Bhikhari Sharma R/o
Village - Khalwa Khap Tola, Ward No. 2, P.S - Nautan, District - West
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sarvesh Kashyap, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Umanath Mishra, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises
out of Nautan Police Station Case No. 186 of 2025 dated
26.04.2025, disclosing the offence under Sections 80 and 3(5) of
the BNS lodged by the informant, Daroga Thakur.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged
that his daughter was married with one Sunil Sharma in the year
2019 and due to non fulfillment of dowry, she was subjected to
torture and ultimately, eliminated. Accordingly, the present FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner being father-in-law of the deceased has not committed
any offence as alleged in the FIR and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3778 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/4
implicated in this case. He further submits that there is nothing
specific against this petitioner while cause of death is said to be
asphyxia as a result of hanging and not due to torture or
strangulation. It has next been submitted that the husband of the
deceased, namely, Sunil Sharma, at the time of death of the
deceased, was in Saudi Arabia since 15.10.2024 till his arrival
after hearing the news of his wife’s death. It has further been
submitted that the petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and he
has been living with his elder son in another house in the same
village. As such, he, in any way, cannot be held responsible for
the death of the deceased. Lastly, it has been submitted that the
husband of the deceased along with other accused persons have
already been granted anticipatory bail on 25.11.2025 by the
learned Trial Court itself vide ABP No. 2649/2025.
5. On the other hand, learned APP opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. However, concedes
that the husband and other persons have been granted bail by the
learned Trial Court itself.
6. After having heard learned counsel for the
parties and taking into consideration the fact that nothing
specific has been alleged against this petitioner and the husband
and other persons have been granted bail by the learned Trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3778 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026
3/4
Court itself, petitioner is father-in-law of the deceased and he
used to live in another house with his elder son, this Court is
inclined to grant the petitioner the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. This application for anticipatory bail is,
accordingly, allowed.
8. Let the petitioner, named above, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks
from today, 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 learned Sub-Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with
aforesaid Police Station Case subject to the condition as laid
down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023, as well as the
following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should
be the family member/relative of the
petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall
appear on each and every date before
the Trial Court and failure to do so for
two consecutive dates without
plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his bail bond by the
Trial Court itself;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3778 of 2026(3) dt.20-02-2026
4/4
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in
no way try to induce or promise or
threat the witnesses or tamper with the
evidences, failing which the State shall
be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall
desist from committing any criminal
offence again, failing which the State
shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of his/her bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.