Anita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12500 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-132 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA PS District- Darbhanga ====================================================== 1.

Anita Devi Son of Late Hare Ram Resident of Village - Kariyan, Police Station - Rosera, District - Samastipur.

2.

Ajeet Ram @ Ajeet Kumar Ram Son of Late Hare Ram Resident of Village - Kariyan, Police Station - Rosera, District - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Gudiya Kumari Wife of Awadhesh Ram Resident of Village - Kariyan, Police Station - Rosera, P.O. - Ilmas Nagar, District - Samastipur. Present Address Village - Balaha, P.S. - Sadar(Fekla), Dist. - Darbhanga. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, dated 03.09.2025, lodged under Sections 85, 126(2), 115(2), 351(2), 352, 74 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as "BNS, 2023") and under Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against four named accused persons, including the present petitioner, alleging that they all assaulted the informant due to non-fulfillment of the dowry demand.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12500 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Counsel further submits that the entire allegations made in the FIR are absolutely false and not acceptable. Counsel further submits that petitioner No. 1 is the mother-in-law and petitioner No. 2 is the brother-in-law of the informant, who are residing separately from the informant and other family members. Counsel further submits that the marriage was solemnized in the year 2023 and the informant was residing with her husband at Delhi. Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedents of the petitioners are clean.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners but fairly submits that the petitioner No. 1 is the mother-in-law and the petitioner No. 2 is the brother-inlaw of the informant.

6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of this case, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12500 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 3/3 in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 132 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.

7. The Trial Court is hereby directed to verify the criminal antecedents of the petitioners, and in case it is found at any stage that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the Trial Court shall take steps for cancellation of the petitioners' bail bond. However, the acceptance of the bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for the purpose of or in the name of verification. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T