Pankaj Sahni @ Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22580 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-321 Year-2025 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Pankaj Sahni @ Pankaj Kumar Son of Umesh Sahni Resident of Village - Methunapur, P.S.- Minapur, District - Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Saroj Kumar Sharma, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Binod Kumar, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar @ S.K., Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 80(2) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that marriage of daughter of informant was solemnized with this petitioner on 01.06.2023 as per Hindu rites and rituals. It is alleged that after marriage, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, started torturing and harassing the victim due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry and subsequently, killed her.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22580 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case merely because he happens to be husband of the deceased. At no point of time, petitioner tortured or harassed the victim or demanded dowry. As a matter of fact, the deceased committed suicide. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation of that he, along with other accused persons, killed the victim due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. Petitioner is husband of the deceased who died unnatural death at her matrimonial house within seven years of marriage.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, gravity of offence and the fact that petitioner is husband of the deceased who died unnatural death at her matrimonial house within seven years of marriage, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22580 of 2026(3) dt.29-06-2026 3/3 petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T