Dismissed¶¶7

Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Feb 2026CR. MISC./76070/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; dowry death case under sections 304B, 201 and 34 IPC; Paroo P.S. Case No. 153 of 2020, District Muzaffarpur, Bihar; informant Moti Sahni; wife disappeared/killed on 15.03.2020, body never located; five-year delay in approaching the Court; petitioner lodged no missing-person/FIR to trace wife; complicity argued by APP Jitendra Kumar Singh; single-judge order of Rajiv Roy, J., Patna High Court, dated 24-02-2026.

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail refused: the FIR is of 2020, the petitioner took the route of legal remedy only after five years, his wife remains traceless, and it is not his case that he lodged any FIR to locate her. ¶¶6

Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76070 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2020 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar Son of Nawal Sahni Village- Bhagwatpur PS -Paroo District -Muzaffarpur Bihar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 24-02-2026 Heard Mrs. Rupa Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

¶15

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 153 of 2020 for the offence under sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the IPC lodged on 15.03.2020 by the informant, Moti Sahni.

¶16

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the lady was married to this petitioner in the year 2019 but was always tortured for dowry. On 15.03.2020, he had a telephonic conversation but thereafter, the mobile was off and when they went to the place, came to know that she has been killed and even they failed to locate the body. This led to the FIR.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76070 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026 2/2

¶19

has no role to play in the matter and the lady disappeared.

¶20

Learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh opposes the prayer submitting that the FIR is of the year 2020, the daughter of the informant disappeared, she could not been located and the petitioner chose to sat over the matter which clearly shows his complicity.

¶21

Considering the submission of the parties as also that the FIR is of the year 2020, the petitioner has taken route to legal remedy after five years, his wife is traceless and it is not the case of the petitioner that he lodged any FIR to locate her, in that background, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

¶22

The anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

¶23

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶24

Adnan/-

¶25

U T

Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Sahni @ Ranjit Kumar 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

Gopal @ Gopal Gond Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar @ Nitish Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sudish Sharma @ Sudisht Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Kumar @ Dipak Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Icici Lombard General Insurance Company Limited, Vs Rekha Devi