Vijay Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33013 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2025 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Vijay Singh son of Late Pashupati Singh Resident of Village-Fakuli, P.SChapra Mufassil, District-Saran 2.
Dhiraj singh Son of Vijay Singh Resident of Village-Fakuli, P.S-Chapra Mufassil, District-Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeet Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 26-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offences punishable u/s 80(2)/3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. All the F.I.R. named accused persons including the petitioners, on non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, in furtherance of the common intention are said to have committed murder of the daughter of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are father-in-law and brother-in-law of the deceased and the allegations made in the FIR are general and omnibus in nature. It would be apparent from the FIR itself that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33013 of 2025(2) dt.26-05-2025 2/3 marriage of the informant's daughter dates back to the year 2016 and after a lapse of so many years, there is no question of demand of dowry and the consequent torture with regard thereof. If that be the matter, no presumption of dowry death would be valid against these petitioners. Considering it to be a case otherwise, there is no eyewitness to the occurrence and it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the husband of the deceased, namely, Niraj Singh is already in custody.
It is further submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the inquest report and the postmortem report show abrasion 1⁄2×1⁄2 near left medulla which is also mentioned in the bail rejection order and this kind of injury would also go to indicate that there could not have been any intention of anyone to kill the deceased. Further, in any view of the matter, since the death has taken in her matrimonial house, the husband, namely, Niraj Singh, would be primarily responsible for the welfare for his wife. It is next submitted that charge sheet has already been submitted in the present case on 17.04.2025 and the petitioners are in custody since 19.01.2025 with no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State, however, opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33013 of 2025(2) dt.26-05-2025 3/3 circumstances and particularly that the husband of the deceased, namely, Neeraj Kumar, who would be primarily responsible for the welfare of his wife (deceased), is already in custody, the above named petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 06 of 2025.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T