Sakali Devi is alive, High Court accepts apology of Rakesh Kumar Sharma, SHO, Tajpur Police Station, SP, Samastipur who reported her to be dead

In  Sakali Devi vs. The State of Bihar & Anr. (2026), Patna High Court's Division Bench of Chief Justice S K Sahoo and Justice Harish Kumar passed a 12-page long judgment dated May 12, 2026 dealt with an error in reporting death appellant. The core legal dispute was the erroneous abatement of a criminal appeal based on an incorrect police report stating the appellant, Sakali Devi, had died. The respondent no. 2 was Ashok Kumar Singh, Nikaspur, Tajpur, Distt.- Samastipur.

The application was filed by Sakali Devi to recall the abatement order and restore her appeal, arguing that she was alive. The court ruled to restore the appeal because the report of the appellant's death, which led to the abatement, was factually incorrect. The police officials responsible for the erroneous report admitted their mistake, tendered unconditional apologies, and explained that the error was due to misidentification stemming from incomplete identifying details (lack of husband's name) in the initial inquiry. The court deemed the error to be inadvertent and genuine. The order dated March 13, 2026, which abated Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 377 of 2015, was recalled. The Criminal Appeal was restored to its original file. The unconditional and unqualified apology tendered by the Superintendent of Police and the Station House Officer was accepted. 

The March 13, 2026 order reads: "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." This order was passed due to misrepresentation by the police officials. 

The suspension order issued against the Station House Officer, Tajpur, was directed to be revoked. The Criminal Miscellaneous application was disposed of. Sakali Devi had filed a Criminal Miscellaneous application seeking to recall an order dated March 13, 2026, which had abated her Criminal Appeal (DB) No. 377 of 2015. The abatement occurred because the police, specifically the SHO of Tajpur Police Station and the Superintendent of Police, Samastipur, had submitted a report erroneously stating that Sakali Devi was dead, misidentifying her with another person of the same name. Sakali Devi presented evidence that she was alive and well, including official documents and a certificate from the Gram Panchayat Mukhiya. Both the Superintendent of Police and the SHO appeared before the court, tendered unconditional and unqualified apologies, and admitted the error was inadvertent due to the lack of complete parentage details in the initial request for the appellant's status. The Superintendent of Police had suspended the SHO for this lapse. 

The High Court accepted their apologies, recalled the abatement order and restored the original criminal appeal, and directed the revocation of the SHO's suspension, acknowledging the mistake as genuine. The court also directed its own Joint Registrar (List) to ensure complete appellant details are provided when seeking status reports in the future.

Order of Additional Sessions Judge-1st -cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Buxar set aside

Justice Arun Kumar Jha of Patna High Court sets aside the order of Additional Sessions Judge-1st -cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Buxar upon hearing an appeal under Section 14(A)(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 against the refusal of prayer for bail by order dated September 16, 2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-1st -cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act, Buxar in connection with Dumraon P.S. Case No. 146 of 2022. The case pertained to offences under Sections 394 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Sections 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act. The judgement was delivered in Din Bandhu Singh v. State of Bihar. 

As per the prosecution case, a loot was committed on a petrol pump and the unknown miscreants looted Rs.5,14,000/-from the said petrol pump and the Manager was shot at, who, succumbed to his injury. The name of the appellant transpired during investigation as one of the accused persons also involved in the alleged occurrence.

The appellant's counsel submitted that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Umesh Singh. Otherwise, nothing material has come up against the appellant and the charge sheet has been submitted. The appellant is in custody since 17.08.2022 and he has got clean antecedent. He submitted that co-accused persons have been granted bail vide Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 2910 of 2022 and Criminal Appeal (SJ) 3757 of 2022 by a common judgement dated 15.12.2022. The case of the appellant is similar to that of them. This submission was opposed wherein it was submitted that the appellant was named by co-accused persons for his involvement regarding providing vehicle to the miscreants, who committed the offence at the petrol pump and he also received Rs. 5,000/- of the allotted amount. 

Taking note of the fact that the name of the appellant came up only in the confessional statement of co-accused and no recovery has been shown from the appellant and also considering the grant of bail to the co-accused persons and submission of charge sheet, the Court issued a direction granting bail to the appellant on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-1st -cum- Special Judge, SC/ST (POA) Act and Children Court, Buxar in connection with Dumraon P.S. Case No. 146 of 2022. It laid down the following conditions mentioned in Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the appellant, preferably one of the parents.

(ii) The appellant will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below. 

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the appellant will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.