Fakirchand Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20918 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-495 Year-2024 Thana- MUFFASIL District- Aurangabad ====================================================== 1.
Fakirchand Ram Son of Late Tadhuni Ram village- Bahuara, Ps- Muffasil, Dist- Aurangabad 2.
Suganti Devi Wife of Amarjit Kumar village- Bahuara, Ps- Muffasil, DistAurangabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mukul Kumari, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 30-04-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 495 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 80(2), 238 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 26.12.2024 by the informant, Anuj Ram.
3. As per the prosecution story, the petitioners are father-in-law and the sister-in-law (gotni), the allegation is that the deceased Rinki Devi was married to Amit Ram but was always tortured for dowry and on the fateful day, came to know that she has suffered injury due to fall near the handpump as they reached there, found that the mortal remains have been consigned to flame and all the accused members have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20918 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 2/3 disappeared. This led to the F.I.R.
4. It is the contention of these two petitioners that they were living separately from the couple, the husband is in custody since 28.12.2024, the informant participated in the last rites whereafter the F.I.R.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that nothing is on record to show that they separated.
6. Taking into account the aforesaid facts as also that the petitioner no.1 (father-in-law) is an aged person while the petitioner no.2 is the sister-in-law (gotni), the husband is in custody, they do not have criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 495 of 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., as also with the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20918 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 3/3 member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T