Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Shanti Kuwr @ Shanti Kuer @ Shanti KunwarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to regular bail after charge framing and the lapse of the stipulated period.

Summary

Shanti Kunwar, the petitioner, was accused in PS Karahgar Case No.302 of 2025 under sections 80(2), 238(a) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for allegedly torturing and causing the death of her daughter‑in‑law. She has been in custody since 18 September 2025. An earlier bail application was rejected on 24 February 2026, but the court allowed her to renew the plea after charge framing or after three months, whichever was later. Charges were framed on 10 March 2026, satisfying the condition for renewal, and the petitioner offered to cooperate with the trial. Considering the material on record, the elapsed custody period, and the statutory provision, the court directed that she be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail after the charge has been framed and more than three months have elapsed since the earlier bail order.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • criminal procedure
  • murder
  • torture
  • mother‑in‑law
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • charge framing
  • custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40629 of 2026

                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-302 Year-2025 Thana- KARAHGAR District- Rohtas
                 ======================================================
                 Shanti Kuwr @ Shanti Kuer @ Shanti Kunwar, Wife of Late Hiralal Thakur
                 @ Hira Thakur @ Hiralal Sharma, Resident of Village- Baheri, P.S.-
                 Kargahar, District- Rohtas.


                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                            ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Babu Nandan Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-07-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                2. The petitioner has renewed her prayer for grant of

                   regular bail in connection with Karahgar P.S. Case no.302 of

                   2025, registered under sections 80(2), 238(a) and 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the

                   informant was married to the son of the petitioner in April,

                   2024. It is further stated that she was tortured by the accused

                   persons including the petitioner herein, who happens to be her

                   mother-in-law, and finally she was done to death. Her body was

                   disposed of.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40629 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner

          submits that the earlier application for bail of the petitioner was

          rejected vide order dated 24.2.2026 passed in Cr. Misc.

          no.87721 of 2025 giving liberty to the petitioner to renew her

          prayer for bail after framing of charge or after three months,

          whichever is later. It is submitted that more than 3 months have

          passed since the said order and charge has been framed against

          the petitioner vide order dated 10.3.2026 passed in Sessions

          Trial no.132 of 2026, order-sheet of which is enclosed as

          Annexure-P/3 to the petition. The petitioner is in custody since

          18.9.2025 and undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

                       5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

          A.P.P. for the State.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in

          the F.I.R., the material that has transpired in course of

          investigation as noted in the earlier order of rejection, the liberty

          granted in the order dated 24.2.2026 (Annexure-P/1), charge

          having been framed against the petitioner in the learned trial

          Court and the petitioner having remained in custody since

          18.9.2025, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail in

          connection with Karahgar P.S. Case no.302 of 2025, on
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40629 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                                        3/3




                      furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with

                      two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                      learned District and Additional Sessions Judge, Sasaram,

                      Rohtas.



                                                  (Partha Sarthy, J)
avinash/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.