Sushama Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8347 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-297 Year-2024 Thana- CHANDI District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Sushama Devi Wife of Ramchandra Prasad @ Ramchandr Prasad Yadav R/O-Village- Mosimpur, PS- Chandi, Distt.- Nalanda 2.
Shobha Devi Wife of Munarik Yadav R/O-Village- Mosimpur, PS- Chandi, Distt.- Nalanda 3.
Reshama Devi @ Reshami Devi Wife of Baban Kumar R/O-VillageMosimpur, PS- Chandi, Distt.- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Rajeev Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025 Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B, 302, 328 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that daughter of informant was married with co-accused Praduman Yadav on 08.07.2022 according to Hindu rites and rituals and at the time of marriage, informant gave Rs. 4,00,000/- cash, one motorcycle of Rs. 1,50,000/-, gold chain and other household articles. It is alleged that after marriage, all the accused persons named in the F.I.R., including these petitioners, started demanding dowry and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8347 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/3 due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, all the accused persons, including these petitioners, killed daughter of informant.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case merely because Petitioner No. 1 happens to be cousin mother-in-law, Petitioner No. 2 happens to be mother-in-law and Petitioner No. 3 happens to be cousin Gotni of the deceased. Petitioners are victim of over implication. As a matter of fact, the alleged occurrence took place on 23.12.2023 and informant himself stated that the deceased had taken pesticide by mistake for which, a U.D. Case bearing Chandi P.S. Case No. 32 of 2023 was lodged and after six days, this false and concocted case has been lodged. There are general and omnibus allegations and there is no specific allegation of demand of dowry or torture against these petitioners.
Petitioners are separate in mess & property and have got no concern with the affairs of the deceased and her husband. It is further submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that thrust of accusation is against husband of the deceased who is already in custody since 06.02.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8347 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 3/3
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that petitioners are named in the F.I.R. with accusation that these petitioners, along with other accused persons, killed daughter of informant due to nonfulfillment of demand of dowry.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and general and omnibus nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Hilsa (Nalanda) in connection with Chandi P.S. Case No. 297 of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T