Chanchal Singh @ Gallu Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7639 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-203 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAKOTHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Chanchal Singh @ Gallu Singh Son of Naresh Singh @ Naresh Patel Resident of Village -Pipra Dih, P.S - Piprakothi, Distt. - East Champaran. 2.
Shankar Singh Son of Naresh Singh @ Naresh Patel Resident of Village -Pipra Dih, P.S - Piprakothi, Distt. - East Champaran. 3.
Prabhawati Devi Wife of Naresh Singh @ Naresh Patel Resident of Village -Pipra Dih, P.S - Piprakothi, Distt. - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kundan Rathore Alias Kundan Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, A.P.P Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate Mr. Harsha Shashwat, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Piprakothi P.S. Case No. 203 of 2025 lodged on 24.06.2025, for the offence punishable under Sections 103, 238 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Motihari, East Champaran.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against five named accused persons including the present petitioners and 4-5 unknown persons. The informant has stated that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7639 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 marriage of his daughter was solemnized on 26.04.2025 and in the name of marriage, he gave gifts to the accused persons. It has been alleged by the informant that the petitioners along with other accused persons have killed his daughter and concealed the dead body at an unknown place.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Counsel submits that the petitioner nos.1 and 2 are brother in law of the deceased and petitioner no.3 is the mother in law of the deceased. Counsel submits that the father in law is already in custody. He further submits that the petitioners have clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that the marriage of the informant's daughter was solemnized on 26.04.2025 and the alleged occurrence took place on 24.06.2025 i.e. within two months.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
7. Upon the specific query of the court from the counsel for the petitioners regarding the status of the husband of the deceased, he submits that the husband of the deceased is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7639 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 3/3 working outside the State.
8. As such, in the present facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners are hereby rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T