Manorama Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29746 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2024 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Manorama Devi wife of Jai Prakash Narain Village- Nawadih, Sun Shivam Apratment 4th floor Flat No. e, inside of Shyamli Hotel, Nawadih, Dharjori, Po- shramik Nagar, Dist- Dhanbad, Jharkhand ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar bihar 2.

Punam Kumari wife of Avinash Prakash Village- Bahera, Ps- Belauv, DistKaimur (Bhabua) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 290 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498 A of the IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

3. As per complaint case, petitioner and other is said to have demanded dowry and tortured the complainant for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner being a mother-in-law has falsely been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29746 of 2025(2) dt.14-05-2025 2/3 implicated in the case. Petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged in the FIR. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further submits that complaint has been filed and cognizance has been taken under Section 323, 341, 498 A of the IPC and Section 4 of D.P Act. Necessary process has been issued against the petitioner and now the petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail against the order passed by the concerned court. He further submits that petitioner being a lady having no say in the family affairs of the complainant's family.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner having no say in the family affairs of the complainant, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand)

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29746 of 2025(2) dt.14-05-2025 3/3 with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M, Bhabua in connection with Complaint P.S. Case No. 290 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) vashudha/- U T