Dismissed¶22

Akloo Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC21 Apr 2026CR. MISC./20344/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court Criminal Miscellaneous No.20344 of 2026 arising out of Gaighat P.S. Case No. 399 of 2023, District Muzaffarpur; anticipatory bail application by Akloo Sahni and Jaikal Devi (in-laws of deceased) refused on 21-04-2026 by Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh; offence Sections 304(B)/34 IPC (dowry death/strangulation for non-fulfilment of dowry); defence pleas of innocence, false implication as in-laws, separate mess and property, thrust of accusation on husband, clean antecedents; State opposition on ground petitioners named in F.I.R. with specific strangulation allegation; counsel Sunil Kumar Pandey for petitioners, A.P.P. Pronoti Singh for State.

What did the court decide?

Considering the nature and seriousness of the accusation, the court refused the petitioners' prayer for anticipatory bail. ¶22

Akloo Sahni Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20344 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-399 Year-2023 Thana- GAIGHAT District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Akloo Sahni Son of Mana Sahni Resident of village - Sura, P.S.- Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur.

¶5

Jaikal Devi Wife of Akloo Sahni Resident of village - Sura, P.S.- Gaighat, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Pronoti Singh, A.P.P.

¶11

======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶13

2 21-04-2026

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

¶15

State.

¶16

Petitioners apprehend arrest in Gaighat P. S. Case No. 399 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

As per the prosecution case, on 14.09.2023 informant received information on mobile phone that her daughter has committed suicide. It is alleged that these petitioners along with other F.I.R. named accused persons killed the daughter of the informant by strangulation, due to nonfulfillment of dowry.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20344 of 2026(2) dt.21-04-2026 2/2

¶20

petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case merely because they are in-laws of the deceased. Petitioners are separate in mess and property and have got no concern with the affairs of the couple. Thrust of accusation is against husband of the deceased. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and there is specific allegation against them that they along with other accused persons killed the deceased by strangulation.

¶22

Considering the nature and seriousness of accusation, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is refused.

¶23

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶24

Navya/-

¶25

U T

Akloo Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akloo Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pandav Yadav @ Pandav Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ganga Mahto @ Ganga Sagar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Rai @ Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Naoman @ Md. Nauman Vs The State of Bihar

Bhaday Saw @ Bhaday Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Shyam Kumar @ Shyam Baran Mahto Vs The State of Bihar