Patna High Court
Ganga Kumari @ GangaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Ganga Kumari, a government school teacher, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under Sections 80(2) and 61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita concerning the death of a woman allegedly linked to dowry demands and extra‑marital affairs. The informant alleged that the deceased's husband, Ajit, had threatened the petitioner and that the deceased was found dead with multiple injuries, but the petitioner contended she was falsely implicated, had no eye‑witness status, and that the death was a suicide. The petitioner highlighted her clean antecedent, marital status, and cooperation with the investigation, while the State opposed bail but could not rebut these points. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties, and conditioned the bail on the petitioner’s cooperation with the investigation. The order also directed that the trial court may cancel the bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the allegations under Sections 80(2) and 61.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioner constitute a ground to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 482(2), 61, 80(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 80(2) BNSS
- Section 61 BNSS
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- dowry harassment
- false implication
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43853 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2024 Thana- Pothia District- Katihar
======================================================
Ganga Kumari @ Ganga W/o Prashant Kumar, D/o Anirudwa Poddar R/o
vill- Darji Bharti patti, Banmankhi, P.O. and P.S.- Banmanki, Distt.- Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Babu Yadav, Advocate
Mr. Umesh Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and
61 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that his daughter was married to Ajit on 1-3-2023, after
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43853 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
2/5
marriage the accused persons including the petitioner started
torturing his daughter for non-fulfillment of dowry demand of a
motorcycle and Rs. 10 lakhs for purchasing land, further the
victim also disclosed that Ajit is having an extra marital affairs
with Ganga (petitioner) and when the victim protested the
relationship, Ajit threatened that if demand is not met, he will
marry Ganga, further Ajit on 26-10- 2024 informed from an
unknown number that victim died, accordingly he along with
the family members reached the place of occurrence and found
the dead body of the victim lying inside a room with multiple
injury marks and the accused persons had fled.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant, it is next submitted that informant is not an eye
witness to the occurrence. It is further submitted that it is not in
dispute that police was informed and the dead body of the
victim was recovered after breaking the door, which amply
demonstrates that victim had committed suicide. The learned
counsel for the petitioner further submits that in sum and
substance the allegation against the petitioner is that she was
having an extra marital relation with the husband of the
deceased and when the said relationship was objected by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43853 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
3/5
deceased, she was threatened by Ajit leading to the occurrence.
It is also submitted that petitioner is a government school
teacher and is married to Prashant Kumar, as would manifest
from the photographs annexed with the supplementary affidavit.
It is further submitted that during course of investigation, it
transpired that deceased was having an affair with one Siddhant
and call details and chats were retrieved by the Investigating
Offier, it is thus submitted that it appears that since her
relationship with Siddhant was objected, as such, the occurrence
was committed, but then a false allegation came to be alleged
that Ajit was having an affair with the petitioner. It is further
submitted that since petitioner is married from before and is a
government school teacher why the petitioner would have been
in a relationship with Ajit. It is further submitted that since Ajit
and petitioner both are teacher and had met during their training
and since they were known, as such, the informant implicated
the petitioner. It is also submitted that petitioner will not
abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove her
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, but then are not in a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43853 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
4/5
position to rebut the submissions of the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is a
government school teacher and is a married lady and during the
course of investigation, it transpired that deceased was in a
relationship with Siddhant.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into consideration the submissions made by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the
petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender
before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from
today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with
Pothiya Katihar P.S. Case No. 101 of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner despite
giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the
investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43853 of 2025(4) dt.09-02-2026
5/5
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned
police station through the learned Trial Court.
9. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…