Matin @ Md. Matin v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38799 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-478 Year-2025 Thana- PALASI District- Araria ====================================================== 1.
Matin @ Md. Matin S/O Chashmulaya @ Taslim R/O Vill- Sonapur, Ward No 09, Ps- Sikti, Distt- Araria 2.
Nijhat @ Asamati Khatun @ Nijhat Khatun W/O Md. Matin R/O VillSonapur, Ward No 09, Ps- Sikti, Distt- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Kishore Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Palasi P.S. Case No.478 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 115(2), 352, 80 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is that the informant's daughter was married to the accused Md. Rashid and thereafter the named accused persons, including the petitioners, started demanding Rs.2,50,000/- as dowry and on account of nonfulfillment of the same, they subjected her to physical and mental cruelty. It is alleged that around three months prior to the
2/4 incident the accused persons assaulted the daughter of the informant and abandoned her at her parents' house, where she died on 31.12.2024.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case merely because they happen to be the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. It has further been submitted that admittedly the daughter of the informant had gone to her parents' house and after three months she died and no postmortem was done or information to police was given at the relevant time. It has next been submitted that as an afterthought after almost one year a complaint was filed with allegations of demanding dowry and committing murder of the daughter of the informant for nonfulfillment of the same. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail
3/4 bonds of Rs.10,000/-(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 Palasi P.S. Case No.478 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond. (v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
4/4
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T