Chhathi Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4979 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2025 Thana- RIVILGANJ District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Chhathi Devi Wife of Late Natha Yadav Resident of Village- Khairwar, P.S.- Revilganj, District- Saran 2.
Chathi Devi @ Chhathi Devi Wife of Rudal Yadav Resident of VillageKhairwar, P.S.- Revilganj, District- Saran 3.
Sangeeta Devi Wife of Ramesh Yadav Resident of Village- Khairwar, P.S.- Revilganj, District- Saran 4.
Amit Kumar Yadav @ Amit Yadav @ Uma @ Gunga Son of Rudal Yadav Resident of Village- Khairwar, P.S.- Revilganj, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Harish Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners who apprehend arrest in connection with Rivilganj P.S. Case No. 261 of 2025 lodged on 11.08.2025, for the offences punishable under sections 103(1), 238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution, the F.I.R. has been lodged alleging that the daughter of the informant was killed due to non-fulfillment of the demand for dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4979 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/3 petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence, and the present case has been instituted on the basis of false and concocted allegations. Learned counsel further submits that the alleged occurrence took place on 08.08.2025, whereas the F.I.R. was lodged after a delay of four days, for which no satisfactory explanation has been furnished. It is further submitted that the petitioners have no concern with the family affairs of the deceased, as they were living separately from her. Learned counsel also submits that, in fact, the deceased died due to severe stomach pain and, while being taken to the hospital, she expired on the way. The informant and his family members were duly informed of the said fact, and the dead body was cremated in their presence.
However, with an ulterior motive to extort money, the present F.I.R. has been lodged by making false allegations against the entire in-laws' family, including petitioner no.1, namely, Chhathi Devi, who is about 80 years old, and petitioner no.4, Amit Kumar Yadav @ Amit Yadav @ Uma @ Gunga, who is about 18 years old.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Upon specific query of the Court about the husband, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4979 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026 3/3 husband of the deceased has not surrendered presently as per his knowledge and he is trying to pursue bail.
7. After going through the FIR and considering the age of petitioner no.1, namely, Chhathi Devi and petitioner no. 4, namely, Amit Kumar Yadav @ Amit Yadav @ Uma @ Gunga, let them be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty ₹ Thousand only) each, as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1st Class, Saran, Chhapra, in connection with the aforementioned case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
8. So far as petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are concerned, considering the nature of allegation levelled in the FIR, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to them. Accordingly, their prayer for bail is hereby rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T