Geeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24444 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2024 Thana- KORANSARAI District- Buxar ====================================================== 1.
Geeta Devi W/o Rajesh Yadav R/o of Village- Bankat, Thana- Koransarai, District- Buxar 2.
Dhan Ji Singh @ Dhanji Yadav S/o Rajesh Yadav @ Rajesh Singh Yadav R/o of Village- Bankat, Thana- Koransarai, District- Buxar 3.
Nisha Devi @ Manisha Devi W/o Dhanji Yadav R/o of Village- Bankat, Thana- Koransarai, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Saroj Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025 Heard Mr. Saroj Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Koransarai P.S. Case No. 92 of 2024 registered under Sections 80(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
2/4
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioners along with other family members had killed the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner no.1 is the mother-in-law of the deceased (daughter of the informant), the petitioner nos.2 is the brother of the husband of the deceased and petitioner no.3 is the sister-in-law of the husband of the deceased and have no concern with the affairs of the deceased and her husband. The petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds the petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the nature of allegation made in the FIR, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner nos.1 and 3, if so advised, may surrender before the learned District Court and seek regular bail. The learned District Court is directed to pass a necessary order,
3/4 in accordance with law, on the basis of materials available on record, on the same day, the bail application is filed, without any further delay and without being prejudiced by any observation made by this Court.
8. So far as, the petitioner no.2 is concerned, I find that there is no direct involvement of petitioner no.2 in the commission of alleged murder of the daughter of the informant.
9. The learned District Court is directed to release the petitioner no.2 on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar/ successor Court in connection with Koransarai P.S. Case No. 92 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 of the BNSS.
10. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner no.2, as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is pending against the petitioner no.2, as what has been stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
4/4
11. Accordingly, the present bail application stands disposed of.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Ashishsingh/- U T