Umesh Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38173 of 2026 Arising out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2025 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Umesh Ram S/o- Late Bhikhar Ram Resident of Village- Radhia PSGovindganj District- East Champaran 2.

Chinta Devi W/o- Bullet Ram @ Bulat Ram Resident of Village- Radhia PSGovindganj District- East Champaran 3.

Sunita Devi @ Sunita Kumari D/o- Late Bhikhar Ram, W/o- Kanhaiya Kumar Yadav R/v- Brit Ram Nagar Ps- Paharpur Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Karandeep Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submits that Petitioner No. 1, Umesh Ram has already been arrested during pendency of the instant bail application and hence, he wants to withdraw the anticipatory bail application on his behalf.

3. Permission is granted.

4. The application is dismissed as withdrawn with respect to Petitioner No.1, Umesh Ram only.

5. The Petitioners No. 2 and 3 apprehend their arrest in connection with Govindganj P.S. Case No.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38173 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 2/3 233 of 2025 registered under Sections 80(1) and 61(2) of BNS.

6. Allegation in the F.I.R is that the accused persons, including the petitioners, hatched a conspiracy to strangulate the informant's daughter to death, on the pretext of a snakebite.

7. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the Petitioners No. 2 and 3 happen to be the sisters-in-law (Gotani) and (Nanad) of the deceased respectively. It is further submitted that it would be apparent from the narration of the First Information Report itself that the allegations relating to death of the deceased on account of demand of dowry are general and omnibus in nature rather it appears that these petitioners were sitting in Scorpio car with the deceased and were taking her to the hospital for treatment. Further, the husband who is primarily responsible for the welfare of the wife, is in custody since 22.09.2025. Moreover, the parties have also entered into an amicable settlement and the compromise petition has been annexed as AnnexureP/2.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38173 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 3/3

8. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

9. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the fact that the petitioners are ladies who are living separately and the husband is in custody, coupled with the fact that the informant is not ready to pursue the case any further, it is directed that the Petitioners No. 2 and 3 namely Chinta Devi and Sunita Devi @ Sunita Kumari, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in connection with Govindganj P.S. Case No. 233 of 2025 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned where the case is pending/successor Court, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S, 2023. (Soni Shrivastava, J) Vikash/- U T