Gaya Prasad Gupta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25957 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-129 Year-2024 Thana- Manikpur P.S District- Arwal ====================================================== 1.

Gaya Prasad Gupta Son of Vishu Saw Resident of Village - Manikpur, P.S. - Manikpur, District - Arwal 2.

Kiran Devi Son of Gaya Prasad Gupta Resident of Village - Manikpur, P.S. - Manikpur, District - Arwal 3.

Rajeev Kumar son of Gaya Prasad Gupta Resident of Village - Manikpur, P.S. - Manikpur, District - Arwal 4.

Santosh Kumar not given Resident of Village - Manikpur, P.S. - Manikpur, District - Arwal 5.

Sunita Kumari not given Resident of Village - Manikpur, P.S. - Manikpur, District - Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Bihar 2.

Deepa Kumari w/o Saket Kumar R/O Village and P.S. - Manikpur, DistrictArwal ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mayank Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 16-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Manikpur, Arwal P.S. Case No. 129 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 127(i), 303(2), 85, 352, 351(3), 3(5), 307 BNS and Sections 3⁄4 of the D.P. Act.

3. According to FIR, the accused persons used to torture the victim for non-fulfillment of dowry demand and in consequence thereof, the informant was assaulted by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25957 of 2025(5) dt.16-10-2025 2/3 petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. They are in-laws having no concern with day-to-day affairs of the couple and have falsely been implicated, whereas the husband has been exonerated by the informant. She did not level any kind of allegation against the husband. In reply, the learned counsel for the informant has submitted that there is no dispute at all between the husband and the wife and the petitioners not only tortured the wife (the informant) but also to her husband.

5. In order to explore the possibility of resolving the dispute through the mediation and conciliation process, the matter was referred to the Patna High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

6. The petitioner is directed to pay Rs. 2000/- as conveyance to the lady on the day, she visits the Mediation Centre.

7. In compliance of the order, the lady continuously visited the Mediation Centre, but the petitioners did not appear before the Mediation Centre, nor did they make the payment. For this reason, the mediator, in his report dated 10.02.2025,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25957 of 2025(5) dt.16-10-2025 3/3 mentioned that due to the non-appearance of the petitioners, the amount of Rs. 2000/- was not paid to the informant.

8. The conduct of the petitioners does not appear to be fair and as such, they don't deserve the privileges of anticipatory bail, which is hereby rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T