Lalan Prasad v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16722 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Lalan Prasad S/O Late Bhagelu Sah R/O Village- Chuhari, Police stationChanpatiya, District- West Champaran. 2.
Renu Devi W/O Lalan Prasad R/O Village- Chuhari, Police stationChanpatiya, District- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Brij Kishor Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Yogendra Kumar Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey Mr.Satyam Kumar Ojha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 69, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 is a person with clean antecedent and petitioner no.2 has antecedent of one case and is a woman and the informant alleges that she was married to Manish Kumar on 20.05.2023 and out of the wedlock, a boy was born, but Manish committed suicide on 13.10.2024 as his parents used to torture
2/4 him. Further, the accused persons pressurized the informant not to institute a case as she will be married to her brother in-law, hence the informant changed her statement in the case instituted by the police and started staying with her brother in-law. It is next alleged that her brother in-law started establishing physical relation, but then, at that time she was already pregnant and subsequently, a girl child was born, but her brother in-law resiled from marrying and the accused kept her children and ousted her from the house and even demanded dowry.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant being father in-law and mother in-law. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that a bezaar allegation has been alleged that the son of the petitioners namely Manish committed suicide on account of torture being meted out to him by them. It is further submitted that no parents can indulge in an act where they compel their own son to commit suicide. It is also submitted that if what has been alleged in the instant FIR is a correct fact, then why the informant changed her statement in the case which was instituted by the police with regard to death of Manish. It is further submitted that it might be a possibility
3/4 that Manish committed suicide on account of torture being meted out by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that on account of assurance given by the petitioners that she will get married to her brotherin-law, she changed her statement in a court of law, but then, that is not a fact and is an aspect of investigation. It is further submitted that two children were born out of the wedlock of the informant with Manish and the girl child presently is of tender age, as such, is staying with the informant and the instant case has been instituted only with a view to coerce the petitioners into submission so that they divide the property. It is also submitted that it is not in dispute that the property belongs to the children of Manish and even informant has her share.
5. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application, but then, are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that it does not appear probable that had Manish committed suicide on account of torture being meted out by the petitioners, in that event, the informant would not have disclosed the same merely on an assurance she would get
4/4 married to her brother in-law.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Chanpatiya P. S. Case No.185 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T