Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5839 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2025 Thana- Rampur Chauram District- Arwal ====================================================== 1.
Meena Devi W/o Kaushlendra Singh Resident of Village - Sarauti, P.S - Rampur Chauram, Dist. - Arwal.
2.
Kaushlendra Singh S/o Late Devnandan Singh Resident of Village - Sarauti, P.S - Rampur Chauram, Dist. - Arwal.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ravindra Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Rampur Chauram P.S. Case No. 84 of 2025 dated 02.09.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 85, 103(1), 238, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per prosecution case, after a few years of marriage, the Informant's daughter was subjected to dowry demands of 10,00,000 and a car by her husband Mukesh Kumar and in- ₹ laws. It is alleged that on 01.09.2025, she was allegedly taken away by her husband and brother-in-law on the pretext of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5839 of 2026(3) dt.24-02-2026 2/3 medical treatment but, she did not return.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased. It is next submitted that the deceased was not keeping well and was under treatment and in course of her treatment, her death is said to have been been taken place. There is nothing specific against the petitioners rather the same and general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that the allegation of demand of dowry is false and fabricated and the deceased has left behind two daughters and the petitioners are taking care for grooming them. It is next submitted that the Informant has filed a petition before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on 26.11.2025 with regard to misunderstanding said to have been caused owing to wrong information rather his daughter namely Sarita Kumari died due to sudden chest pain. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedent.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that there is nothing specific against the petitioners and that the informant has subsequently clarified that the F.I.R. was lodged owing to certain misunderstanding while
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5839 of 2026(3) dt.24-02-2026 3/3 the death was caused due to sudden chest pain, let the abovenamed petitioners be released on bail, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arwal in connection with Rampur Chauram P.S. Case No. 84 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document / personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide; (ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(Ajit Kumar, J) rishi/- U T