Patna High Court
Sachin PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023.
Summary
The petitioner, Sachin Prasad, was implicated in a dowry‑death case (Sections 304B, 201, 120B/34 IPC) after his wife, Kriti Kumari, died following a three‑month delay in filing the complaint. He asserted a clean antecedent and claimed the complaint was fabricated, noting that he had received the deceased’s body from the hospital, suggesting his presence at the time of death. The State opposed his anticipatory bail, while the petitioner’s counsel argued the delay and lack of direct evidence. The High Court, considering the delay, the petitioner’s clean record, and the circumstances of the complaint, granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and strict conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) BNSS, 2023. The order also imposed conditions for cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a dowry‑death case under Sections 304B, 201, 120B/34 IPC.
- Whether the three‑month delay in filing the complaint warrants denial of bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s presence at the time of the victim’s death affects bail eligibility.
- Whether a clean criminal antecedent justifies granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 304B, 34
Subjects
- dowry death
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Section 304B
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- false complaint
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86872 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-539 Year-2024 Thana- NAWADAH COMPLAINT CASE
District- Nawada
======================================================
Sachin Prasad S/O Shambhu Mahto R/o vill- Bhaidi, P.S.- Katri Sarai Distt-
Nalanda, AtPresent Mohalla- Gandhi Nagar, Mirzapur, P.S. and Dist.-
Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Kusum Devi W/O Ganesh Prasad R/O Mohalla- Post Mortem Road, Shiv
Nagar, P.S. and Dist.- Nawada.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Subodh Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Pronoti Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Heard Mr. Subodh Prasad, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs. Pronoti Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Complaint Case No. 539 of 2024 dated
18.05.2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 304(B), 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing
torture and caused death of the victim due to non-fulfillment of
demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86872 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/4
allegation as alleged in the complaint petition is false and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the complaint petition. In fact, the deceased namely,
Kriti Kumari has been admitted in emergency condition in
Dharamsheela Devi Multispeciality Hospital, Nawada on
23.02.2024 but she later on died on 28.02.2024 and the dead
body was received by her husband (petitioner) and father of the
complainant, namely, Ganesh Prasad who happens to be the
father of the deceased and petitioner has been made accused
merly on the ground that the petitioner is the husband of the
deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
that it appears from the complaint petition that the same has
been filed on 18.05.2024 after delay of about three months
afterthought only to falsely implicate the petitioner and his
family members and co-accused persons namely Shambhu
Mahto and Mina Devi who happens to be the father the mother
of the petitioner have been granted anticipatory bail by the
learned Court below itself.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86872 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
3/4
the present complaint petition has been filed after delay of about
three months and husband of the complainant has received the
dead body of the deceased in the Hospital which suggests that
he was present at the time of her death, let the petitioner, above
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court
below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of
the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Complaint Case No.
539 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section
482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86872 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
4/4
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…