Dismissed¶16

Seema Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC22 Apr 2026CR. MISC./23554/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court; Criminal Miscellaneous No.23554 of 2026; Seema Devi v. The State of Bihar; anticipatory bail rejected; Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025, Gopalganj; Sections 80 and 238 Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita; Sections 84 and 85 BNSS; absconder declaration; alleged murder over dowry demand; Praveen Kumar, J; order dated 22-04-2026.

What did the court decide?

In view of the processes under Sections 84 and 85 of the BNSS having been issued against the petitioner (who was declared an absconder), the Court was not inclined to grant anticipatory bail and rejected the application. ¶16

Seema Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23554 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2025 Thana- MOHAMMADPUR District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Seema Devi Wife of Rajesh Sahni RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - DIPAU PAKARI P.S - MOHAMMADPUR, GOPALGANJ, BIHAR

¶5

... ... Petitioner

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate Mr. Md. Farooq, Advocate Mr. Shubham Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 22-04-2026

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶10

This application for anticipatory bail arises out of Mohammadpur P.S. Case No. 133 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 80 and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.

¶11

As per the allegation, the petitioner along with co-accused persons murdered the daughter of the informant for non-fulfillment of the dowry demand.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is sister-in-law of the deceased and there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. The husband of the petitioner is in custody and no presumption would be drawn against her as she is herself a daughter-in-law

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23554 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026 2/2

¶14

of the family.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the petitioner has been declared as an absconder and processes under Sections 84 and 85 of the BNSS have been issued against her on 21.07.2025 and 22.08.2025 respectively.

¶16

Heard the parties and perused the record. Considering the fact that 84 and 85 of the BNSS processes have been issued against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and the same is accordingly rejected.

¶17

(Praveen Kumar, J)

¶18

Pawan/-

¶19

U T

Seema Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Seema Devi 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

Khushboo Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Prabhakar Goswami @ Keshri Kumar Goswami Vs The State of Bihar

Sheshnath sah Vs The State of Bihar

Kunal Agarwala @ Kunal Agrawal Vs The State of Bihar

Rubi Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Raja Kumar @ Raja Babu Vs The State of Bihar