Chandeshwari Rishideo @ Chandrakishor Rishidev v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53783 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2024 Thana- GWALPARA District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.

Chandeshwari Rishideo @ Chandrakishor Rishidev S/O Late Ramu Rishideo Resident of Vill.- Bishwari, Ward No.- 03, P.S.- Gwalpara, DistrictMadhepura 2.

Manjula Devi @ Manju Devi W/O Chandeshwari Rishideo @ Chandrakishor Rishideo Resident of Vill.- Bishwari, Ward No.- 03, P.S.- Gwalpara, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in connection with Gwalpara P.S. Case No. 104 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B)/34 of the I.P.C.

3. As per prosecution case, petitioners and other are said to have committed the murder of informant's daughter for non fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 1 is father-in-law and petitioner no. 2 is mother-inlaw of the deceased. He further submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the ground

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53783 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 2/3 that they are in-laws of the deceased. He further submits that petitioners are living separately from the deceased family and they have no say in the family affairs of the deceased. He further submits that husband of the deceased is in jail custody since 12.01.2025. Petitioners are in custody since 05.04.2025 and they bear no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel orally submits that charge sheet has been submitted in the case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits that from the perusal of FIR, it is crystal clear that the occurrence took place on 28.05.2024 and FIR was lodged on 01.06.2024 i.e. after delay of about five days and no plausible explanation has been given by the informant regarding the said delay which the questions the authenticity of the prosecution story.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioners and they have no say in the family affairs of the deceased family, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioners above named be released on bail on furnishing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53783 of 2025(2) dt.11-08-2025 3/3 bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Madhepura in connection with Gwalpara P.S. Case No. 104 of 2024, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

(ii) Petitioners will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) alok/- U T