Geeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39335 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Geeta Devi W/O Ramashish Rai R/O Vill-Bairiya Gumasta Tola, P.SMuffasil, Dist-East Champaran at Motihari 2.
Ramashish Rai S/O Ramdeval Rai R/O Vill-Bairiya Gumasta Tola, P.SMuffasil, Dist-East Champaran at Motihari ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Binay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case no. 160 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Sections 80, 238 & 3 (5) of the BNS.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the daughter of the informant, namely, Ritika Kumar was married with Akash Kumar on 7th of March, 2024. It is further alleged that the daughter of the informant subject to cruelty on account of nonfulfillment of dowry demand. On 14.03.2025, the villagers informed that Ritika Kumar has been badly assaulted by her in-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39335 of 2025(2) dt.01-07-2025 2/3 laws. On 15.03.2024, when the informant went to the house of his daughter, he was told by the female members that all the male persons have gone to cremate the deceased.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that petitioners are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased and they were separated from their son. It is further submitted that the main thrust of allegation is against the husband of the deceased.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioners stating that all the in-laws have killed the daughter of the informant.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case no. 160 of 2025, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39335 of 2025(2) dt.01-07-2025 3/3 Magistrate, Motihari, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T