Rupdev Sahani v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10328 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-471 Year-2020 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Rupdev Sahani Son of Ramanand Sahani Resident of Village- Jogiya, P.S.- Harsidhi, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Abhishek Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Parmanand Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 23-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Muffasil Police Station Case No. 471 of 2020, dated 11.10.2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 324/328/304-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Informant Report the marriage of the informant's sister (now, deceased) was solemnized with the co-accused Anand Mohan Sahni in the year 2014 and out of their wedlock, two girl children were born. After the birth of second girl child, the petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, started demanding Rs. 1,00,000/- as dowry and due to nonfulfillment of the said demand, the deceased was tortured,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10328 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026 2/3 both mentally as well as physically. It is alleged that on 09.10.2020, the petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, killed the sister of the informant by burning her.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior motive. He further submits that the petitioner is a distant relative, i.e. Nandosi, and he was in no way connected with the day-to-day affairs of the deceased and /or her husband. The petitioner is also not the resident of the village of the husband of the deceased.
5. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that within seven years of the marriage, the deceased was killed by her in-laws and the petitioner for demand of dowry. He further submits that the co-accused Rabri Devi, who is the sister of the husband of the deceased, and coaccused Om Prakash Sahani, have been granted regular bail by co-ordinate Benches of this Court.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the materials on record including the impugned order.
7. Within seven years of the marriage, the informant's sister
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10328 of 2026(3) dt.23-04-2026 3/3 died an unnatural death in her matrimonial home. The nature of death is not important whether it is natural, suicidal or accidental but the fact of the matter is that deceased died an unnatural death within seven years of her marriage. There is a presumption against the accused persons under Section 113(A) and 113(B) of the Evidence Act. The offence is serious in nature and the punishment thereof is also serious. The First Information Report was lodged in the year 2020 and the petitioner is named in the First Information Report itself, though he approached the learned District Court for grant of anticipatory bail in the year 2024 and after his anticipatory bail application was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVI, East Champaran, at Motihari, on 22.05.2024, the petitioner has filed an application for grant of anticipatory bail before this Court in February, 2026.
8. Accordingly, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
9. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √