IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55425 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2026 Thana- MALAHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Hem Narayan Sah Son of Chandan Sah Resident of Baldiha, P.O.- Talimapur, P.S.- Jamo Bazar, District - Siwan, Bihar, Pin Code - 841407 ... ... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. Deji Devi @ Deji Kumari Wife of Brajendra Kumar Sah Daughter of Mugal Sah @ Ramendra Prasad, Resident of Village - Sirni Bazar, P.S.- Malahi, District - East Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niranjan Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 2 19-08-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The present application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking cancellation of the regular bail granted to O.P. No. 2 vide order dated 01.07.2026 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari in B.P. No. 1720 of 2026. 3. As per the prosecution case, O.P. No. 2 along with the other co-accused persons, committed the murder of her husband. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the impugned order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, East Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55425 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026 2/4 Champaran at Motihari. However, he has not been able to point out any illegality, infirmity or perversity in the impugned order warranting interference by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction for cancellation of bail. 5. The relevant portion of the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, East Champaran at Motihari reads as follows:- “Heard both sides and perused the record. From perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with allegation that she alongwith other co-accused persons committed murder her husband (informant's son). Inquest report of the deceased is mentioned in para- 2 of the case diary. As per para-3, 4 and 5 of the case diary, the informant in his restatement and the witnesses have supported the prosecution case. However, as per para-33 and 34 of the case diary, the independent witnesses, who are relative of accused persons, have stated that the deceased died due to fall from the rooftop. As per para-54 and 55 of the case diary, the independent witnesses saw the dead body lying near the house of deceased's father- in-law. As per para-65 of the case diary, containing postmortem report, doctor has found many injuries on the dead body and cause of death is due to vital organ injuries in neck as well as chest associated with intracranial haemorrhage, caused by linear and flat, hard and blunt substance. The investigation is under progress. As per para-3 of the bail petition and para-177 of the case diary, the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. There is no any specific allegation that the petitioner committed murder of her husband (informant's son). At the time of the occurrence, the petitioner (deceased's wife) was 26 weeks pregnant, and she has now given birth to a girl child. The petitioner is a female and is in custody since 21.05.2026. In the facts of the case as discussed Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55425 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026 3/4 above, the petitioner is a female having no criminal antecedent, there is no specific allegation of commission of the murder against her, she was pregnant at the time of occurrence and is now the mother of an infant girl child, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner Deji Devi @ Deji Kumari is ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court in the aforesaid case with condition that the petitioner shall co-operate in investigation, subject to further conditions as laid down u/s 480(3) B.N.S.S.” 6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and upon perusal of the impugned order, this Court finds that the learned Sessions Judge has considered the relevant facts and circumstances of the case while granting bail to O.P. No. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to demonstrate that O.P. No. 2 has misused the privilege of bail, violated any of the conditions imposed upon her, attempted to influence the witnesses, tampered with the evidence, or otherwise acted in a manner warranting cancellation of the bail granted to her. 7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is also of the opinion that the possibility that the deceased's wife has been made an accused with a view to depriving her of the benefit of compassionate appointment cannot be completely ruled out. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55425 of 2026(2) dt.19-08-2026 4/4 8. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner has failed to make out any sufficient ground for cancellation of the regular bail granted to O.P. No. 2. The impugned order does not suffer from any such illegality, infirmity or perversity as would warrant interference by this Court. 9. Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed. 10. It is, however, made clear that the observations made hereinabove are confined to the consideration of the present application for cancellation of bail and shall not prejudice the case of either party at any subsequent stage of the proceedings. sadique/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U T