Sushila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49788 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2025 Thana- JAMOBAZAR District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.

Sushila Devi W/O Lal Babu Yadav R/O Rampur, P.S. - Jamo Bazar, DistrictSiwan 2.

Lal Babu Yadav S/O Rangi Yadav R/O Rampur, P.S. - Jamo Bazar, DistrictSiwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raghav Prasad Ms. Urmila Kumai For the Informant Mr. Rakesh Kumar Srivastava For the State :

Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, registered in connection with Jamo Bazar P.S.Case No. 141 of 2025.

3. As per the allegation, the accused persons killed the daughter of the informant for non-fulfilment of demand of dowry and tried to cremate the body, but the police on a tip-off, swung into action and took the dead-body into their custody and sent it for post mortem.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49788 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 2/3 submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated. They are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased having no concern with day-to-day affairs of the couple. It has further been submitted that the FIR itself shows that the allegation of demand of dowry is only against the husband, who is in custody. The petitioners reside separately from the husband of the deceased. The informant did not disclose the name of the villagers from whom he got information about the shocking incident.

5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that the post mortem report and the inquest report show that the injuries suffered by the deceased are ante mortem which shows that she was brutally assaulted before her death. It is further submitted that the petitioners did not inform about the death of the deceased to the informant.

6. There is no allegation of demand of dowry against the petitioners, rather the allegation of demand of dowry is only against the husband Arvind Yadav, who is in custody.

7. Considering the above facts and circumstances, let the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks from the date of communication of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49788 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 3/3 this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Siwan in connection with Jamo Bazar P.S.Case No. 141 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS with further condition that the petitioners shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make themselves available before the court below physically till framing of charges.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T