Patna High Court
Laxman Sharma @ Lakshman SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court denied the petitioner's application for regular bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Laxman Sharma, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 80 and 86 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The FIR alleged that Sharma married the deceased and subsequently tormented her for dowry, leading to her death by alleged poisoning. Sharma's counsel contended that the marriage was not legal, the deceased was a dancer in an orchestra, and a forensic report indicated poisoning, asserting his innocence. The State's counsel relied on the testimony of an independent witness, Muskan Kumari, who claimed Sharma demanded dowry money, quarreled with the deceased, and fled after she consumed poison. After considering the allegations and evidence, the court declined to grant bail, ordering the trial to be completed within nine months.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner under the charges of Sections 80 and 86 of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 80, 86
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- regular bail
- dowry harassment
- dowry death
- poisoning
- marriage dispute
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65910 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2025 Thana- AAYAR District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Laxman Sharma @ Lakshman Sharma Son of Yogendra Sharma @ Jogendra
Sharma Village -Sultanpur PS -Garhani District -Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Diwakar
For the State : Mrs.Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR
PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This is an application for regular bail on
behalf of the petitioner for the offences alleged under
Sections 80 and 86 of the BNS and Sections 3/4 of the D.P.
Act, registered in connection with Ayar P.S.Case No. 29 of
2025.
3. As per the FIR, the love and affection
blossomed to such an extent that the petitioner and the
victim both entered into marriage, but soon thereafter the
petitioner started tormenting the victim for a motor-cycle
and cash amount in dowry.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65910 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
been implicated. The deceased is not legally married wife
of the petitioner. He has submitted further that the dead-
body was found in the house of Ashok Ram, who was
proprietor of the orchestra, in which the deceased was
working as a dancer with the petitioner being also engaged
as a performer in the same orchestra. The learned counsel
for the petitioner denies the marriage between the
petitioner and the deceased. He also submitted that the
FSL report shows that the deceased had consumed
poisonous substance.
5. On the other hand Mr J.N. Thakur, learned
APP for the State, has submitted that the independent
witness Muskan Kumari, who was a nautch girl in the
same orchestra, has stated that the deceased consumed
poisonous substance and when her condition was critical,
her husband Laxman Sharma (the petitioner) was called
but he fled away. This witness has stated further that he
was demanding money from the deceased and he was
usually quarreling for non-fulfillment of the dowry
demand.
6. Taking into consideration the entire aspect of
the matter as well as the allegation levelled against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65910 of 2025(4) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
petitioner, presently, I am not inclined to grant the
petitioner the privilege of bail, which is hereby rejected.
7. It is expected that the trial shall be concluded
within a period of 09 months.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)
HR/-
U T
Checking your session…