Sanchita Devi @ Sujita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20294 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2025 Thana- INARWA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Sanchita Devi @ Sujita Kumari W/o Chandan Mahto @ Chandan Prasad R/o Village- Jabdi, P.S- Bhangaha, Dist.- West Champaran. 2.
Chandan Mahto @ Chandan Prasad Kushwaha S/o Raja Prasad Kushwaha R/o Village- Jabdi, P.S- Bhangaha, Distt.- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pratik Kumar, Advocate.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Singh Shastri, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Inarwa P.S. Case No.104 of 2025 originally instituted under Sections 137(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, however, after investigation the police submitted charge sheet under Sections 103(1), 238, 61(2) read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the marriage of daughter of informant was solemnized with co-accused Dipendra about 14 years back and out of the said wedlock 4 children were born. It is alleged that on account of matrimonial dispute, his daughter came to her parental home but went back to her matrimonial home on 12.07.2025. It is further alleged that till 17.07.2025 the informant was not able to contact his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20294 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 2/3 daughter, therefore, he came to her matrimonial home to enquire about her, but he was informed that his daughter had gone back to her parental home on 17.07.2025, thereafter a search was made but the victim could not be traced.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that petitioner no.1 is married sister-inlaw and petitioner no.2 is brother-in-law of the deceased who have no concern with the day to day affairs of the deceased and her husband. Learned counsel submits that during the course of investigation, the alleged dead body of victim was recovered and co-accused Dipendra was arrested who confessed that he had strangulated the victim on aid and advice of accused persons including the petitioners. He further submits that there is no recovery on the basis of confessional statement recorded by the police in police custody having no evidentiary value.
Learned counsel submits that except the confessional statement of the co-accused, there is no material against the petitioners. The husband and father-in-law of victim are in judicial custody. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.04.2026 passed in Cr.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20294 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026 3/3 Misc. No.17065 of 2026. He further submits that petitioners have got clean antecedent and they undertake to cooperate in the trial of the case.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and the nature of allegation leveled against the petitioners as well as their clean antecedent and the fact that similarly situated coaccused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioners be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount to each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-Ist-cumSpecial Judge (SC/ST) Bettiah, West Champaran/ concerned Court in connection with Inarwa P.S. Case No.104 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) Ritik/- U T