Patna High Court
Sarojiya Devi @ Saroja DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
Petitioner no.2 is granted anticipatory bail, while petitioner no.1 is denied anticipatory bail.
Summary
The petitioners, Sarojiya Devi (mother‑in‑law) and Hiralal Saw (brother‑in‑law), applied for pre‑arrest (anticipatory) bail in a dowry‑related case registered under Sections 80, 238(a) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR alleged cruelty by the husband and in‑laws leading to the death of the informant’s daughter and a hurried cremation. The petitioners claimed innocence, stating they had no involvement and clean antecedents. The Court found that the allegations against the mother‑in‑law were serious enough to deny her anticipatory bail, but observed no specific overt act against the brother‑in‑law and therefore granted him anticipatory bail subject to a bond and sureties. The District Court was directed to release the brother‑in‑law on bail if arrested within four weeks and to verify his criminal antecedents. The application was disposed accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the mother‑in‑law (petitioner no.1) is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the allegations of dowry cruelty and death.
- Whether the brother‑in‑law (petitioner no.2) can be granted anticipatory bail despite the FIR under Sections 80, 238(a) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 238(a), 3(5), 482(2), 80
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- pre‑arrest bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 80
- Section 238(a)
- Section 3(5)
- Section 482(2)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87526 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2025 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Sarojiya Devi @ Saroja Devi Wife of Pana Saw @ Panna Lal Saw Resident
of Village- Kotwara (Jakhim), P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad
2. Hiralal Saw son of Panna Saw @ Panna Lal Saw Resident of Village-
Kotwara (Jakhim), P.S.- Rafiganj, District- Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Binod Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 09-04-2026 Heard Mr. Binod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Uday Pratap
Singh, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 77 of 2025 registered under
Sections 80/238(a), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS),
2023.
3. As per the allegations made in the FIR, the
informant’s daughter, who was married to one Santosh Sao, was
allegedly subjected to cruelty by her husband and in-laws on
account of a dowry demand of Rs. 10 lakh, and upon her death,
followed by a hurried cremation, the present case was instituted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87526 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
2/3
against them.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have
been falsely implicated in the present case. The petitioner no. 1
is the mother-in-law and petitioner no. 2 is the brother-in-law of
the deceased, and since the husband and wife were residing
separately, the petitioners have no concern with the alleged
occurrence. The petitioners have clean antecedents. On these
grounds, the petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having considered the allegations made
in the FIR and the materials available on record, this Court finds
that petitioner no. 1, being the mother-in-law of the deceased,
in view of the nature of allegations made against her and in the
facts of the case, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner no.1 on pre-arrest bail.
7. So far as, petitioner no. 2 is concerned, considering
that he is the brother-in-law of the deceased and was residing
separately, and there appears to be no specific overt act
attributed to him, this Court is of the opinion that petitioner no.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87526 of 2025(4) dt.09-04-2026
3/3
2 has, prima facie, made out a case for grant of anticipatory bail.
8. The learned District Court is directed to release the
petitioner no. 2 on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending
in connection with Rafiganj P.S. Case No. 77 of 2025, subject to
the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
9. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner no. 2, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner no. 2, as what has been stated
in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force
automatically.
10. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.