Sharmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57008 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2025 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Sharmila Devi W/o - Manoj Das Village- Panapur Silauthar Ps- Jandaha Dist- Vaishali 2.
Mahesh Das S/o- Chaturi Ram Village- Panapur Silauthar Ps- Jandaha DistVaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Madhukar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 27-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No. 101 of 2025 for the offence registered under Sections 80, 238, 3(5) of B.N.S., 2023 lodged on 10.03.2025 by the informant Urmila Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the deceased (Urmila Devi) was married with Sanjeev Das, but was tortured for dowry and on 09.03.2025, he came to know that she has been killed and the mortal remains consigned to flame, those responsible for death were not present in the home. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the subsequent story remains unfolded that her husband, Sanjeev Das
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57008 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 2/3 also committed suicide the very next day being aggrieved by the immature death of his wife. This petitioners are neither the family member nor the relative rather a villager and their names may have been dragged alleging that they have participated in the last rites and they have no criminal antecedent. The last submission is that similarly situated villager has been granted relief in Cr. Misc. No. 34597 of 2025 vide an order dated 21.05.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also that a categorical statement has been made that the petitioners have no relationship with the family members of the accused, they are villagers and no direct role has been attributed to them, similarly situated co-accused has been granted relief, as stated above and they have no criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to grant them the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioners in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial MagistrateVII, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Jandaha P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57008 of 2025(2) dt.27-08-2025 3/3 101 of 2025 subject to condition as laid down under Section 438
(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners 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 their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall in 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;
(iv) the petitioners shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T