Sangita Kumari @ Sangita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36995 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2024 Thana- KUNAULI District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

Sangita Kumari @ Sangita Devi Wife of Suraj Kumar Resident of Sharda Nagar, Ward No.- 34, Police Station- Saharsa Sadar, District- Saharsa. 2.

Lalita Kumari @ Soni Kumari Daughter of Satnarayan Mandal @ Devendra Mandal Resident of Village Sikrahatta, Naya Tola, Ward No. 18, Police Station Kunauli, District Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Adv.

For the State :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 3 06-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation in the FIR is that of causing death of the daughter of the informant by the accused persons including the present petitioners on account of non-fulfillment of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are the sisters-in-law of the deceased and they are living separately from the deceased and her husband. It is next submitted that there is no specific allegation against these petitioners and as a matter of fact, the deceased has committed suicide which is also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36995 of 2025(3) dt.06-08-2025 2/2 evident from the postmortem report of the deceased as no ligature mark was found over the body. It is further submitted that the husband of the deceased, who is primarily responsible for the welfare of his wife, has surrendered and is in custody. It is also pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of the bail application.

5. Learned APP for the State, however, strongly opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Kunauli (Dagmara OP) P.S. Case No. 14 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C/ 482 (2) of the BNSS, 2023. (Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T