Patna High Court

Satish PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Satish Paswan, husband of the deceased Neha Kumari, was implicated in a dowry‑death case (PS‑Case No.300 of 2024) under Sections 30, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner subjected his wife to continuous dowry demands, cruelty and ultimately caused her death by assault and hanging, followed by cremation to destroy evidence. The petitioner contends he is innocent, has no specific allegation against him, and is being made a scapegoat by the informant, emphasizing his clean antecedents. The State argues that, as the husband of the deceased, the petitioner bears the onus and should not be granted anticipatory bail. The Patna High Court, after hearing both sides, refused to grant anticipatory bail, directing that if the petitioner surrenders within four weeks, regular bail may be considered by the lower court.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the husband accused in a dowry‑death case under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Whether the mere fact of being the husband of the deceased creates a statutory presumption of guilt precluding anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 238, 30, 3(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
dowry death
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure
bail jurisprudence
husband liability

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88168 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-300 Year-2024 Thana- KAMTAUL District- Darbhanga
                 ======================================================
                 Satish Paswan S/O Sri Mahesh Paswan Resident of Village- Brahampur, P.S.
                 Kamtaul, District- Darbhanga.
                                                                          ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                 Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                   ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   16-01-2026             Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                           2.      The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

                   with Kamtaul P.S. Case No. 300 of 2024 registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 30, 238 & 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                           3.      The prosecution case, in short, is that after Neha

                   Kumari’s (deceased) marriage with the petitioner, she was

                   subjected to continuous dowry demands, mental and physical

                   cruelty by the petitioner and his family. On 16.10.2024, she was

                   allegedly assaulted and hanged to death, and the accused

                   hurriedly cremated her body to destroy evidence.

                           4.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88168 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case.

                     Petitioner is the husband of the deceased. There is no specific

                     allegation against the petitioner. Admittedly, petitioner has been

                     made scapegoat by the informant. It is submitted that after death

                     of deceased, informant was informed and in their presence last

                     rites were performed. Petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

                             5.      On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has

                     vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                     It is submitted that since petitioner is the husband of the

                     deceased, therefore onus lies upon him and he is not entitled for

                     grant of anticipatory bail.

                             6.      Considering the rival submissions made by the

                     learned counsel for the parties, this Court is not inclined to grant

                     anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of

                     anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

                             7.      However, if the petitioner surrenders before the

                     court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays

                     for regular bail, the same would be considered by the court

                     below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the

                     order of this Court.


                                                                 (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…