Arbind Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44634 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2025 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.
Arbind Kumar Singh son of Saryug Singh Resident of Village- Fatehabad Muzaffarpur P.S. -Paroo, District- Bihar 2.
Lalita Devi Wife of Arbind Kumar Singh Resident of Village- Fatehabad Muzaffarpur P.S. -Paroo, District- Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Syed Firoz Raza, Senior Advocate Mr. Hasnain Haider, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 16-07-2025 Heard Mr. Syed Firoz Raza, learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 72 of 2025 for the offence under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. lodged on 21.02.2025 by the informant Pushpa Shahi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleges that her daughter got married in the year 2015 and though in the initial stage they lived happily, later dispute arose on demand of dowry, where the role of the husband and the mother-in-law cropped up. The allegation is that on 20.02.2025, the husband along with his mother ensured killing of the lady which led to
2/4 the F.I.R.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners submit that they are mother-in-law and father-in-law, the husband is in custody, actually it was a case of suicide but has been given a different colour.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer submitting that so far as the mother-in-law is concerned, the allegation is that she played a role along with the husband which led to the ultimate death of the lady.
6. Considering the allegation that has come against the petitioner no. 2, the mother-in-law, namely, Lalita Devi, though she is an aged lady, the fact remains that her name has come along with the husband, in that background, this Court is not inclined to extend her the privilege of anticipatory bail, which is accordingly rejected.
7. So far as the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh is concerned, allegation of dowry demand is there, role of killing is not there, he is an aged person having no criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him privilege of anticipatory bail.
8. In case of petitioner no. 2, Lalita Devi if she approaches the Court and surrender bail application in next four
3/4 weeks after, the Court shall take up the matter and dispose it of preferably on the same day.
9. Let the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-VIII, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 72 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., as also with the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide; (ii) the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next six months to mark his attendance;
(iv) the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh shall in
4/4 no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds; (v) the petitioner no. 1, Arbind Kumar Singh shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J) Jyoti Kumari/- U T