IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18907 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2025 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== Deepesh Kumar Sahni @ Deepesh Kumar S/o- Ram Baran Sahni R/o Village-Harpur Rewari Tole Suriya Tara, P.S- Angarghat District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 21-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter was married to the petitioner about three years back and out of the wedlock, two children were born. Further, accused persons including the petitioner started demanding Rs.1 lakh from the victim and on account of non-fulfillment of the demand, the victim was tortured. It is next alleged that on 19.10.2025, informant was informed by his relatives that victim died, accordingly, he reached the hospital and saw the dead body of his daughter lying, thus, alleges that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18907 of 2026(4) dt.21-07-2026 2/3 victim was poisioned to death. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, being the husband, has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence and the FIR has been instituted after a delay of ten days which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that out of the wedlock, two children were born, as such, the relationship in between the petitioner and the deceased was not strained. It is also submitted that victim consumed poison, as such, she was brought to the hospital where she died during the course of treatment.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim died within seven years of marriage, as such, presumption in law is against the husband. It is further submitted that even if the victim consumed poison leading to her death in that event also it is the husband who created the condition conducive for the victim to take extreme step of ending her life. It is next submitted that investigation in the case against the petitioner is continuing. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18907 of 2026(4) dt.21-07-2026 3/3 A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dalsinghsarai, Samastipur/Successor Court. 7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18907 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2025 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== Deepesh Kumar Sahni @ Deepesh Kumar S/o- Ram Baran Sahni R/o Village-Harpur Rewari Tole Suriya Tara, P.S- Angarghat District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 4 21-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter was married to the petitioner about three years back and out of the wedlock, two children were born. Further, accused persons including the petitioner started demanding Rs.1 lakh from the victim and on account of non-fulfillment of the demand, the victim was tortured. It is next alleged that on 19.10.2025, informant was informed by his relatives that victim died, accordingly, he reached the hospital and saw the dead body of his daughter lying, thus, alleges that Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18907 of 2026(4) dt.21-07-2026 2/3 victim was poisioned to death. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, being the husband, has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence and the FIR has been instituted after a delay of ten days which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is next submitted that out of the wedlock, two children were born, as such, the relationship in between the petitioner and the deceased was not strained. It is also submitted that victim consumed poison, as such, she was brought to the hospital where she died during the course of treatment.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that the victim died within seven years of marriage, as such, presumption in law is against the husband. It is further submitted that even if the victim consumed poison leading to her death in that event also it is the husband who created the condition conducive for the victim to take extreme step of ending her life. It is next submitted that investigation in the case against the petitioner is continuing. 6. Considering the submissions made by the learned Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18907 of 2026(4) dt.21-07-2026 3/3 A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Angarghat P.S. Case No. 122 of 2025 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dalsinghsarai, Samastipur/Successor Court. 7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T