Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5797 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2025 Thana- DHORAIYA District- Banka ====================================================== Sunita Devi, W/o Kedar Manjhi, Resident of village - Sitachak. P.SDhoraiya, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual mode.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 155 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No.1572 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 103, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that he received a call from his son-in-law, who stated that his daughter has locked herself inside the room and she is not opening the doors and when he, along with his family, reached there, he saw his daughter lying there in the courtyard and he suspected that his daughter was killed by his father-inlaw and mother-in-law (petitioner).
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
2/4 husband of the deceased has not been made an accused in this case and in fact the case has been lodged only against the fatherin-law and mother-in-law (petitioner). It has further been submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case only on mere suspicion and no previous case of any demand of dowry or torture was ever reported. It has next been submitted that the post-mortem was conducted and it was found that the cause of death was asphyxia due to hanging and therefore, it is evident that the daughter-in-law of the petitioner has committed suicide and there was no external injury found on her body. It has also been submitted that the father-in-law of the deceased has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.04.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 15344 of 2026.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
3/4 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Dhoraiya P.S. Case No. 155 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No.1572 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the abovementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
4/4
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/ayushkrU T