Sakali Devi vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33059 of 2026
In
CRIMINAL APPEAL (DB) No.377 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2011 Thana- TAJPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Sakali Devi, W/o Late Bal Govind Sada, R/o Village- Morba, Anaandpur,
P.S.- Tajpur, Distt.- Samastipur, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ashok Kumar Singh, S/o Nanki Singh, R/o Village - Nikaspur, P.S.- Tajpur,
Distt.- Samastipur
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar Pankaj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Ambastha, SC- 26
Mr. Santosh Kumar Mishra, AC to SC- 26
Mr. Divit Vinod, AC to SC- 26
Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
Date : 12-05-2026
In pursuance of the order dated 08.05.2026, both
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur Mr. Arvind Pratap Singh
and Station House Officer, Tajpur Police Station, District-
Samastipur, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, are present through
virtual mode.
2. The Superintendent of Police, Samastipur has
submitted a letter bearing no. 966 dated 10.05.2026, the copy of
which has been placed on record and it is submitted that in
compliance of the order of this Court, list of 293 remaining

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
2/12
Appeals has been sent to the office of the Patna High Court
explaining the well being of the accused/appellants. The
aforesaid fact has also been verified by the Joint Registrar
(List), who has endorced the aforenoted statement.
3. In the order dated 08.05.2026, we mentioned as
follows:
“2. The Criminal Appeal was taken up
on 13.03.2026 and the following order was
passed:-
“ Perused Letter No. 155 dated 11.02.2026
of the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur
along with the report of S.H.O., Tajpur
Police Station, wherein it is indicated that
during the enquiry it came to light that the
sole appellant, namely Sakli Devi, is dead.
2. In view of the said letter and having
regard to Section 394 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973, which
corresponds to Section 435 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and
inasmuch as no near relative has filed any
application seeking leave to continue the
appeal, the present Criminal Appeal stands
abated and is accordingly disposed of.
3. Let the Trial Court Records be sent back
to the concerned Trial Court.”
3. In the Criminal Miscellaneous case,
it has been mentioned by the appellant as
follows:-
“4. That it is humbly submitted that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
3/12
Hon'ble Court in the aforesaid order dated
13.03.2026 has held the Appeal to have
been abated on the basis of report
submitted by SHO, Tajpur Police Station
contained in Letter No. 155 dated
11.02.2026 issued by the Superintendent
Of Police, Samastipur, wherein it is
indicated that the present Appellant -
Petitioner namely Sakli Devi, is dead.
5. That it is humbly submitted that the
aforesaid fact is incorrect and factually
wrong as the Appellant - Petitioner as on
date is alive and in sound health and mind.
Further, she is the deponent of the present
Modification Application. The Appellant
has been issued PAN Card, AADHAR
Card, Bank Passbook, Bihar Govt. scheme
Self Help Group Saving Account Passbook,
etc.
6. That the competent incumbent Mukhiya,
Morba (South) Gram Panchyat has also
issued certificate dated 18.03.2026 on the
request of the Appellant stating therein,
that the Appellant is alive and is residing
at her house in the said Village.
7. That the Appellant is an illiterate
innocent lady and it appears that
inadvertently, in the ADHAAR Card and
PAN Card her date of birth has been
incorrectly recorded as 01.01.1935.
Appellant's Ration Card issued in 2018
records her age as 62 years.
8. That in view of the facts stated above, it
is crystal clear that if the aforesaid
modification as prayed by the Petitioner is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
4/12
not allowed by the Hon'ble Court then the
same may cause serious prejudice to the
Petitioner - Appellant and therefore, the
said Order dated 13.03.2026 (Annexure -
P/1) passed in Cr.Appeal (DB) No. 377 of
2015 needs to be modified accordingly and
the connected Criminal Appeal against
acquittal needs to be restored to its
original file.
9. That it appears that the SHO, Tajpur
Police Station has callously prepared the
report regarding Appellant's death sitting
in his chamber without any documentary
evidence and also without actual spot
verification.
10. That the Petitioner would suffer
irreparable loss if case the present
Modification application is not allowed
and the reliefs are not granted. Appellant
Petitioner has a good case and the
grounds for allowing the Appeal against
acquittal have been squarely stated in the
connected memo of Appeal.”
4. Both the Superintendent of Police,
Samastipur, Mr. Arvind Pratap Singh and the
S.H.O., Tajpur Police Station, Mr. Rakesh Kumar
Sharma are present through virtual mode and
submitted that when a report was received that
one Sakali Devi is dead, the reports were
submitted before this Court but it has come
subsequently to their knowledge that, in fact, the
appellant is alive and accordingly, a fresh report
has been submitted.”

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
5/12
4. It is needless to say that, before this Cr. Misc.
case was filed by the appellant Sakali Devi for recalling the
order dated 13.03.2026 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal
(DB) No. 377 of 2015 and to restore the aforesaid appeal to the
original file, a report had been filed by Letter No. 375 dated
02.04.2026, wherein it is stated that after verification, it has
been found that ‘Sakali Devi’ with regard to whom an earlier
report was sent that “she is dead”, was not the correct report. On
proper verification, it came to light that the appellant Sakali
Devi in the present Criminal Appeal is still alive and
accordingly, it has been informed to the High Court that said
‘Sakali Devi’, is alive.
5. The show-cause affidavit has been filed by the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur, wherein it is stated as
follows:-
“5. That at the very outset, it is stated and
submitted that the present restoration application
filed by this petitioner seeking restoration of
Criminal Appeal No. 377 of 2015 may be allowed
in view of Letter No. 375/Legal Cell dated 2.4.2026
already issued by the Superintendent of Police,
Samastipur which is addressed to the Assistant
Registrar of this Hon’ble Court explaining the
factual background including the fact that this
petitioner is alive.
A copy of the Letter No.
375/Legal Cell dated
2.4.2026 is annexed as
Annexure A .
6. That unconditional and unqualified apology is
being tendered in this regard as the submission of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
6/12
earlier report leading to disposal of the criminal
appeal was an advertent error.
7. That in this regard it is stated and explained
that:-
a) In the details received in the Office of the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur at Sr. No.
48 details of the Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 377 of
2015 with name ‘Sakli Devi’ address Resident of
Village Morba Anandpur, P.S. Tajpur, District
Samastipur was mentioned without any
husband’s details.
A copy of the list of cases
is annexed as Annexure
B .
b) Accordingly, under Memo No. 102/Legal Cell
dated 7.2.2026 the Station House Officer of
Tajpur Police Station was directed to verify the
living status of Sakli Devi.
A copy of the Memo No.
102/Legal Cell dated
7.2.2026 is annexed as
Annexure C .
c) That under DR No. 313/26 dated 11.02.2026 it
was reported by the Station House Officer,
Tajpur Police Station that Sakli Devi Wife of
Dhanraj Paswan is not alive.
A copy of the DR No.
313/26 dated 11.02.2026
is annexed as Annexure
D .
d) In this regard a report dated 10.02.2026 issued
by the Sarpanch (Shri Ram Babu Pandit) of the
Panchayat was also forwarded by the local
police station with name of Sakli Devi Wife of
Dhanraj Paswan and that she has died about
seven years back.
A copy of the report of
the Sarpanch dated
10.02.2026 is annexed
as Annexure E.
e) Later, under Letter No. 155 dated 11.02.2026 the
matter was reported to the Assistant Registrar of
this Hon’ble Court that Sakli Devi Wife of
Dhanranj Paswan is not alive. However,
inadvertently it was mentioned that a death
certificate is annexed with the letter whereas
instead of death certificate report of the
Sarpanch was attached.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
7/12
A copy of the Letter No.
155 dated 11.02.2026 is
annexed as Annexure F .
f) Based thereupon on 13.03.2026 this Hon’ble
Court was pleased to dispose of the criminal
appeal.
g) In the order sheet of 13.03.2026 in the cause title
head name of the appellant was mentioned as
Sakli Devi Wife of Late Bal Govinda Sada.
h) Later, upon information of submission of
erroneous report of living status of this petitioner
that she has died, under Memo No. 370 dated
1.4.2026, the Station House Officer of Tajpur
Police Station has been suspended by District
Order-617/2026 under Memo No-951/Legal
dated-10-05-2026 and Departmental Proceding.
A copy of the Memo No.
370 dated 1.4.2026 is
annexed as and a copy
of Memo Bo-951, dtd-
10-05-2026.
Annexure G .
i) In response thereto, under Memo No. 715/26
dated 1.4.2026 an explanation was received from
the Station House Officer of Tajpur Police
Station that Sakli Devi is Wife of Late Bal
Govinda Sada, and his report was relating to
Sakli Devi Wife of Dhanraj Paswan and his
earlier report carried factual error due to
absence of parentage of Sakli Devi. However,
now the details were re- verified with police
station records of the connected Tajpur Police
Station Case No. 148 of 2011 dated 6.5.2011 and
thereafter local verification was done in Village
Raitola Morwa in presence of Chaukidar,
Sarpanch and villagers and it was found that the
petitioner herein who is the appellant of Cr.
Appeal (DB) No. 377 of 2015 is alive.
A copy of the Memo No.
715/26 dated 1.4.2026 is
annexed as Annexure
H .
j) In fact, he i.e. the Station House Officer has also
mentioned about the separate report dated
1.4.2026 (Memo No. 712/26) issued in this
regard by the SHO, Tajpur.
A copy of the report
dated 1.4.2026 (Memo

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
8/12
No. 712/26) is annexed
as Annexure I .
k) Thereafter under Letter No. 375 dated 2.4.2026
(Annexure-A) report was submitted before this
Hon’ble Court.
8. That above facts may be considered, and the
contempt proceedings may not be drawn against
the answering opposite party.
xxx xxx xxx
10. That in this case the error was inadvertent,
unintentional and made due to oversight and the
answering opposite party assures that he shall be
more careful in obtaining and in submitting report
before this Hon’ble Court.
11. That the answering opposite party tenders his
unconditional and unqualified apology for the
inconveniences caused to this Hon’ble Court which
was neither intentional nor deliberate.
12. That the answering respondent shall be more
careful and cautious in submission of report before
this Hon’ble Court.”
6. Learned Counsel for the State also pointing out
from Annexure-B of the affidavit filed by the Superintendent of
Police that the well being reports were called for by this Court
in different cases, do not indicate the parentage or husband’s
name mentioned in the appeal memo and only the appellant(s)
name and address are mentioned therein, which creates a
problem in proper identification of the appellant, inasmuch as,
there is every likelihood that in the name of the very same
person, there may be more persons in that village under the
same police station of the same district.
7. The Joint Registrar (List) Mr. Pranaw Shankar

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
9/12
has assured this Court that henceforth, when the well being
reports shall be called for in different Criminal Appeals, the
complete address of the appellant/appellants, as per the cause
title of the Memo of Appeal shall be furnished. The affidavit
filed by the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur is taken on
record.
8. The unconditional and unqualified apology
tendered by the Superintendent of Police is accepted and the
prayer made in the affidavit is allowed. The order dated
13.03.2026, passed in Cr. App. (DB) No. 377 of 2015, stands
recalled and the said Criminal Appeal is restored to the original
file.
9. In pursuance of the said order Mr. Rakesh Kumar
Sharma, Station House Officer, Tajpur has also filed a show-
cause affidavit wherein it is stated as follows:
“5. That the answering opposite party has been
suspended by the Superintendent of Police,
Samastipur vide order dated 10.05.2026.
A copy of the suspension
order dated 10.05.2026
(Samastipur District
Order No. 617/2026) is
annexed as Annexure-A .
6. That the answering opposite party had erred in
sending a report on the living status of this
petitioner, as due to oversight and absence of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
10/12
parentage details of this petitioner living status
report of some other Sakli Devi was sent before this
Hon’ble Court leading to disposal of the appeal.
xxx xxx xxx
10. That unconditional and unqualified apology is
being tendered in this regard as the submission of
earlier report leading to disposal of the criminal
appeal was an advertent error.
11. That in this regard it is stated and explained
that: -
a. In the details received in the Office of the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur at Sr.
No. 48 details of the Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 377
of 2015 with name ‘Sakli Devi’ address
Resident of Village Morba Anandpur, P.S.
Tajpur, District Samastipur was mentioned
without any husband’s details.
A copy of the list of cases
is annexed as Annexure
B .
b. Accordingly, under Memo No. 102/Legal Cell
dated 7.2.2026 the deponent was directed to
verify the living status of Sakli Devi.
A copy of the Memo No.
102/Legal Cell dated
7.2.2026 is annexed as
Annexure C .
c. That under DR No. 313/26 dated 11.02.2026
the deponent reported that Sakli Devi Wife of
Dhanraj Paswan is not alive.
A copy of the DR No.
313/26 dated 11.02.2026
is annexed as Annexure
D .
d. In this regard a report dated 10.02.2026
issued by the Sarpanch (Shri Ram Babu Pandit)
of the Panchayat was also forwarded by the
deponent with name of Sakli Devi Wife of
Dhanraj Paswan and that she has died about
seven years back.
A copy of the report of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
11/12
the Sarpanch dated
10.02.2026 is annexed
as Annexure E.
e. That thereafter the same was reported before this
Hon’ble Court and based thereupon on 13.03.2026
this Hon’ble Court was pleased to dispose of the
criminal appeal.
f. Later, upon information of submission of
erroneous report of living status of this petitioner
that she has died, under Memo No. 370 dated
1.4.2026, the deponent was show caused in the
matter by the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur.
A copy of the Memo No. 370
dated 1.4.2026 is annexed as
Annexure-F.
g. In response thereto, under Memo No. 715/26
dated 1.4.2026 an explanation was submitted by
the deponent that Sakli Devi is Wife of Late Bal
Govinda Sada, and his report was relating to
Sakli Devi Wife of Dhanraj Paswan and his
earlier report carried factual error due to
absence of parentage of Sakli Devi. However,
now the details were re-verified with police
station records of the connected Tajpur Police
Station Case No. 148 of 2011 dated 6.5.2011 and
thereafter local verification was done in Village
Raitola Morwa in presence of Chaukidar,
Sarpanch and villagers and it was found that the
petitioner herein who is the appellant of Cr.
Appeal (DB) No. 377 of 2015 is alive.
A copy of the Memo No.
715/26 dated 1.4.2026 is
annexed as Annexure
H .
h. In fact, he i.e. the deponent has also
mentioned about the separate report dated
1.4.2026 (Memo No. 712/26) issued in this
regard by tmeur.
A copy of the report
dated 1.4.2026 (Memo
No. 712/26) is annexed
as Annexure H (Series) .
xxx xxx xxx
13. That the answering opposite party is a police
officer and he cannot ever think to submit a false

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33059 of 2026 dt.12-05-2026
12/12
report in any judicial proceeding.”
10. The unconditional and unqualified apology,
which has also been tendered by the Station House Officer,
Tajpur is accepted.
11. In the show-cause affidavit filed by the
Superintendent of Police, Samastipur, we found that one
‘Rakesh Kumar Sharma’ Station House Officer, Tajpur has been
suspended and a show-cause for the departmental proceeding
has been issued to him.
12. Since the mistake appears to be a genuine one,
we direct that the suspension order be revoked. It is expected
that the S.H.O., Tajpur shall be careful in future, while
submitting such report.
13. The present application stands disposed off.


(Sangam Kumar Sahoo, CJ)
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
AFR/NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 14.05.2026
Transmission Date 14.05.2026