Ramanand Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25478 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-273 Year-2024 Thana- MAHNAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Ramanand Singh Son of Nirsu Narayan Singh Resident of Village - Basudeopur Chandel, P.S.- Mahnar, District - Vaishali 2.
Jaimala Devi Wife of Sri Ramanand Singh Resident of Village - Basudeopur Chandel, P.S.- Mahnar, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Khusboo ,sex-female, aged about___ village- Basudeopur chandel p.s. Mahnar, District- Vaishali Address of Maike- D/0 Late Digvijay kumar, village -Bhojpati, P.S..- Sarai, District- Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ravi Shankar For the Opposite Party/state:
Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party No.2:
None ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026
1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Mahnar P.S. Case No. 273 of 2024 dated 09.08.2024 registered under Section 85, 115(2), 126(2), 352, 351(2)(3)(5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. The prosecution case in brief is that the informant was married with one Sidharth Shankar Singh (son of the petitioners) as per Hindu customs on 21.11.2021 and it is alleged that when she went to her matrimonial home, her
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25478 of 2025(4) dt.07-05-2026 2/3 husband and the petitioners subjected her to torture for want of a car as dowry and on 09.08.2024 at about 7:00 A.M. when she was cooking food all the accused persons assaulted her, snatched her belongings and ousted her from her matrimonial home.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated by the informant in the instant case only because of matrimonial dispute with her husband. The petitioner no. 1 is the father-in-law and the petitioner no. 2 is the mother-in-law of the informant. The husband of the informant has been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25569 of 2025.
5. No one appears for the opposite party no. 2.
6. Regard being had to the submission made by the parties, taking into consideration the fact that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners who are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the informant and the husband of the informant has already been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, accordingly, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25478 of 2025(4) dt.07-05-2026 3/3 anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from today on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahnar P.S. Case No. 273 of 2024 subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T