Patna High Court
Ramchandra Sahani @ Ramchandra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The bail application is rejected.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramchandra Sahani, sought bail in a case registered under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 concerning the alleged dowry‑related murder of Indu Kumari. The prosecution alleged that the deceased was killed by her in‑laws over a demand for a motorcycle and cash, and that the accused had fled the scene, with a video of the incident allegedly withheld. The petitioner claimed innocence, asserted that the death was natural, that the case was filed after cremation, and that the parties had compromised. The State argued that the investigation showed the in‑laws’ involvement, the missing video evidence, and possible collusion between the informant and the petitioner. After hearing both sides, the Court declined to grant bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing the petitioner to re‑apply after six months if the trial remains pending.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 in view of the alleged dowry‑death and missing evidence.
- Whether the alleged compromise between parties and the petitioner’s claim of innocence affect the bail decision.
- Whether the risk of tampering with evidence or fleeing justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 238, 3(5), 80
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- criminal procedure
- compromise
- judicial custody
- evidence tampering
- B.N.S. 2023
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57708 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-535 Year-2024 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ramchandra Sahani @ Ramchandra Kumar S/o- Pathal Sahani Resident of
Bardahan Nayka Tola, P.S- Muffasil, Dist- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Rathore Alias Kundan Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
6 06-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 535 of 2024 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 80, 238, 3(5) of the B.N.S.,
2023.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that Indu
Kumari (deceased) was being killed by her in-laws. On
05.11.2024 the informant came to know about this through a
telephonic message. He also came to know that all the in-laws
have fled away from the house. It is alleged that after the
marriage the deceased was subjected to cruelty on account of
non-fulfillment of the dowry demand of a Bullet motorcycle and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57708 of 2025(6) dt.06-01-2026
2/3
Rs. 5,00,000/- in cash.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
deceased has died a natural death and that the cremation was
done in the presence of the family members of the deceased, and
after the cremation, this case has been filed. Learned counsel for
the petitioner further submits that the parties have compromised
the case. It has also been submitted that a statement has been
made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal
antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since
06.06.2025.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State and submits that in this case, a case diary was
called for, and from perusal of the case diary, it is clear that
when the I.O. visited the place of occurrence, he found that all
the family members had fled away and their house was locked.
From perusal of the case diary, it also transpires that the
deceased had also made a video before being killed, which is
said to be kept in a pen drive, but the same is not being provided
to the I.O. by the informant. The deceased has admittedly died
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57708 of 2025(6) dt.06-01-2026
3/3
in the matrimonial house and the conduct of the in-laws shows
that they have actually committed the offence, as they have fled
away from the house on the date of the occurrence itself. The
deceased has also made a video but it seems that due to the
compromise between the parties, the pen drive is not being
provided to the I.O. by the informant. The informant and the
petitioner both are in collusion whereas the deceased demands
justice.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage
however, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for
bail after six months if the trial is not concluded.
7. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial.
8. Accordingly, the present bail application of the
petitioner stands rejected.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…