Dhanmanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 35649 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2025 Thana- GOBARDHANA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Dhanmanti Devi W/o Lalu Ram R/o Village - Bakhari Bazar, Police Station - Gobardhana, District - West Champaran.
2.
Chanda Devi W/o Raj Kumar Ram R/o Village - Bakhari Bazar, Police Station - Gobardhana, District - West Champaran. 3.
Neha Devi @ Neha Kumari W/o Sheshnath Ram R/o Village - Bakhari Bazar, Police Station - Gobardhana, District - West Champaran. 4.
Munni Devi W/o Lalan Ram R/o Village - Bakhari Bazar, Police Station - Gobardhana, District - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Kr. Singh No. 1, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 02-06-2026 Heard Mr. Vijay Kumar Singh No. 1, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Satyendra Prasad, learned Additional Public Prosecution for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Gobardhana P.S. Case No. 55 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the B.N.S.
3. Allegedly on the fateful night, the son of the informant, after taking dinner, left his house, whereupon, all the F.I.R. named accused persons with whom the informant had a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 35649 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 2/3 dispute, brutally assaulted and killed him and tied with a tree and succeeded in fleeing away.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that after going through the F.I.R., it is evident that the informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence, moreover, the occurrence took place in the night of 03.11.2025 but the F.I.R. came to be instituted on 05.11.2025 by implicating the name of all the family members, with whom there was enmity, including the petitioners, who all are women having absolutely fair antecedents. The reason of death has been disclosed as asphyxia due to strangulation and there is no other mark of assault as is evident from the impugned order. It is further contended that the petitioners are women having no allegation of active participation in the crime and they undertake that they will fully cooperate in the proceeding of the court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that since, the informant had enmity with the petitioners and their family and there is a specific accusation against them, hence, their complicity in the crime cannot be ruled out.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 35649 of 2026(2) dt.02-06-2026 3/3 of the fact that the informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence coupled with the delay in lodging of the F.I.R. as well as the petitioners are women having fair antecedents, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Bagaha, West Champaran in connection with Gobardhana P.S. Case No. 55 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(Harish Kumar, J) sadique/- U T