Patna High Court

Bechani DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 9 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court denied bail to the petitioner, finding the nature and gravity of the offences and the evidence against her to preclude release.

Summary

Bechani Devi, the petitioner, applied for bail in a murder case (Case No. 288 of 2024) filed under Sections 103(1) and 3/5 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with other provisions of the Arms Act. An earlier anticipatory bail application was rejected. The petitioner claims she has no criminal antecedent and was implicated solely on the basis of a co‑accused’s confessional statement, which she argues lacks evidentiary value. The State contends that the confessional statement, post‑mortem report, and the charge‑sheet (including Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2)(ka), 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act) establish her involvement in the murder. Considering the seriousness of the offences and the material evidence, the Court declined to grant bail and ordered the trial court to expedite the trial.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the nature and gravity of the offences and the evidentiary material, including a co‑accused’s confessional statement and post‑mortem report.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61(2)(ka)

Subjects

bail
anticipatory bail
criminal procedure
confessional statement
murder
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Arms Act
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89600 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2024 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad
                 ======================================================
                 Bechani Devi Wife of Late Uday Yadav Resident of Village - Satanpur, Police
                 Station - Kako, District – Jahanabad

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   09-02-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State. Perused the case diary.

                             2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kako P.S.

                   Case No. 288 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections

                   103(1) and 3 / 5 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                             3. Earlier vide order dated 29.08.2025 passed in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 13560 of 2025, the anticipatory bail of the petitioner

                   was rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of

                   the offences.

                             4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 15.09.2025

                   without any rhymes or reason. The petitioner has no criminal

                   antecedent. He further submitted that petitioner is an innocent
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89600 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
                                            2/3




          lady and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The

          name of the petitioner surfaced in this case on the basis of

          confessional statement of co-accused Arbind Kumar, which has

          no evidentiary value in the eye of law. No specific overt act is

          alleged against the petitioner.

                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed

          the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further

          submitted that the name of the petitioner has transpired on the

          basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Arbind Kumar

          who has specifically stated that the accused persons including

          him committed the murder of the deceased on the direction of

          this petitioner. He further submitted that post-mortem report

          also supports the prosecution case. Learned APP further

          submitted that after completion of the investigation, the I.O of

          this case has submitted Charge-sheet under Sections 103(1),

          238, 61(2)(ka) and 3(5) of B.N.S and Section 27 of Arms Act

          against the petitioner and other co-accused.

                   6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of

          the case, nature and gravity of offence this Court is not inclined

          to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

                    7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the

          petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89600 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                              8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…