Suresh Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37492 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2026 Thana- BANMANKHI District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.

Suresh Choudhary Son of Late Nunulal Choudhary Resident of VillageBanmankhi, P.S.- Banmankhi, Distt.- Purnea. 2.

Chandrika Devi Wife of Suresh Choudhary Resident of Village- Banmankhi, P.S.- Banmankhi, District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2026

1. No one appears on behalf of the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha is present.

2. The Investigating Officer of the case in compliance of the order dated 18.06.2026 is present in the Court.

3. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that informant alleges that her daughter was married to Ajit in June 2025, further after marriage the victim was subjected to cruelty for non-fulfillment of dowry demand, it is further alleged that on 26.01.2026 at 03:00 PM, the accused persons killed the victim by strangulating her.

4. Learned A.P.P. for the State submits that petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased, as it would manifest from the pleadings made in the anticipatory bail application, it is also submitted that during the course of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37492 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026 2/2 investigation, it transpired that the tower location of the mobile of petitioner No. 2 was at the place of occurrence.

5. The Investigating Officer of the case who is present in the Court submits that postmortem of the dead body was carried out and the doctor opined the cause of death as asphyxia on account of throttling i.e. strangulation.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State, at this stage, submits that deceased was married to Ajit in the year 2025 and the death took place within some months of marriage, as such, presumption in law also is against the husband of the deceased and his family members and the cause of death has been opined to be strangulation, it is further submitted that it does not appear probable that had the victim been strangulated in the house the petitioners would not have come to know about the same.

7. Since no one is appearing on behalf of the petitioners, as such, the case is dismissed for non-prosecution.

8. The personal appearance of the Investigation Officer is dispensed with.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T