Pratima Devi @ Pratima Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16029 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2024 Thana- Panchanpur District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Pratima Devi @ Pratima Kumari W/O Sarjun Kumar Resident of VillageGajadhar Bigha, P.S- Panchanpur, District- Gaya. 2.
Sarjun Kumar S/O Bachu Yadav @ Bachhu Yadav Resident of VillageGajadhar Bigha, P.S- Panchanpur, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Panchanpur P.S. Case No. 102 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80/3(5) of the BNS.
3. The marriage of the daughter of the informant was solemnized with one Arun Kumar in the year 2023. At the time of marriage, allegedly sufficient dowry was extended to the accused persons and subsequent thereto, the coupled also blessed with a baby boy. Later on 31.08.2024, the informant received an information that his daughter is done to death by the accused persons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16029 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that admittedly the occurrence took place on 31.08.2024 and the postmortem was conducted on 31.08.2024 itself but the FIR came to be instituted on 02.09.2024. The petitioners are none else but the brother-in-law and sister-in-law of the deceased. There is no specific allegation against the petitioners rather the allegation has been levelled against all the family members. The husband of the deceased is in judicial custody. During the course of investigation, the independent witnesses have categorically stated that on the fateful day, on account of some dispute between the husband and wife, the deceased by locking herself inside the room, committed suicide and this fact also corroborated from the postmortem report. Moreover, the petitioners are the persons of tender age having fair antecedent and they undertake that they will fully cooperate in the proceedings of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submitted that the deceased was done to death just within two years of her marriage and soon before the occurrence, there was a demand of dowry and, as such, complicity of the petitioners cannot be ruled out and the ingredients are available to constitute an offence punishable
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16029 of 2025(3) dt.12-05-2025 3/3 under Section 80/3(5) of the BNS.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the statement of the independent witnesses as also the fact that the petitioners are sister-in-law and brother-in-law respectively and the delay in lodging of the FIR as also the fact that the husband is behind the bar apart from the fair antecedent, 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 four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM-VIII, Gaya in connection with Panchanpur P.S. Case No. 102 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS, with further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T