Patna High Court
Ravish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravish Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a dowry‑death case registered under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. He alleged that the informant, his father‑in‑law, fabricated the dowry‑demand and torture allegations and that the victim, his wife, voluntarily returned to the matrimonial home before her death. The State argued that the death occurred within seven years of marriage, invoking the statutory presumption against the husband in dowry‑death cases, and highlighted the post‑mortem finding of asphyxia due to hanging. The court examined the credibility of the informant’s testimony, the nature of the allegations, and the statutory presumption. Concluding that the prosecution’s case was not sufficiently weakened to merit bail, the court denied the petition for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in a dowry‑death case under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
- Whether the statutory presumption against the husband applies in the present facts.
- Whether the informant’s testimony and the post‑mortem report constitute sufficient ground to deny bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 3(5), 80(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- presumption against husband
- Sections 80(2) BNS
- Section 3(5) BNS
- criminal procedure
- bail jurisprudence
- evidence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80035 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2024 Thana- SARMERA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Ravish Kumar Son of Ramjanam Yadav R/O Village - Husaina, P.S. -
Sarmera, District - Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pushpa Sinha, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and
3(5) of the BNS.
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 the petitioner on
10.07.2024 and after marriage the accused persons including the
petitioner were demanding dowry of Rs.2 lakhs and a
motorcycle and on account of non-fulfillment of the demand,
the victim was tortured, as such, the informant brought the
victim back to her parental home, but, on persuasion of the
petitioner, the victim went back to her matrimonial home.
Further, on 17.12.2024, the informant received an information
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80035 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
that his daughter has been strangulated to death, accordingly, he
reached the place of occurrence and informed the police and the
dead body was sent for postmortem.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant being the husband of the deceased. It is further
submitted that allegation of demand of dowry and torture is
general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that had the
petitioner been torturing the victim for dowry in that event the
informant would not have allowed the victim to go back to her
matrimonial home. It is also submitted that informant is not an
eyewitness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges
around suspicion.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that
the death of the victim took place within seven years of the
marriage and, as such, the presumption in law is against the
husband. It is further submitted that the postmortem report
records asphyxia due to hanging. It is, thus, submitted that even
if the victim committed suicide then petitioner, being the
husband, was responsible for creating condition conducive for
the victim to take extreme step of ending her life. It is next
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80035 of 2025(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
submitted that there is allegation of demand of dowry and
torture and the informant specifically alleges that he had
brought the victim back to her parental home but on insistence
of the petitioner she was sent back to her matrimonial home and
thereafter the occurrence took place. It is also submitted that the
case of the petitioner is different from the case of his family
members who have been granted the privilege of anticipatory
bail.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with
Sarmera P.S. Case No. 283 of 2024 pending in the Court of
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda at Bihar
Sharif/Successor Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…