Bijay Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58959 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2025 Thana- BAIRIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Bijay Singh Son of Yamuna Singh R/o Village - PUrani Gudari, P.S. - Kalibagh, Dist. - West Champaran.

2.

Pramila Devi @ Chunmun Singh W/o Bijay singh R/o Village - Purani Gudari, P.S. - Kalibagh, Dist. - West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Dular Sah For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-09-2025 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, being father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. It is next submitted that informant alleges that his daughter in the year 2020 was married to Avijit, further after marriage the accused persons were demanding dowry of Rs. 10 lakhs and a car,

2/4 thereafter on account of non-fulfillment of the demand, the victim was tortured, next alleges that on 14-3-2025 the brotherin-law and husband of the victim informed that the victim is seriously ill, accordingly the informant came to the place of occurrence and saw the dead body of his daughter lying in the room and the accused had fled, thus alleges that the victim was strangulated to death by a rope.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges around suspicion. It is further submitted that the daughter of the informant was married to Avijit in the year 2020 and the instant FIR came to be instituted in the year 2025, but then in the last five years of marriage, no case ever came to be instituted either by the victim or the informant alleging demand of dowry and torture. It is next submitted that from perusal of allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that brother-in-law and the husband of the victim informed the informant that the victim was ill based on which he came to the place of occurrence, but by then she had died on account of committing suicide. It is submitted that had the petitioners been involved in the

3/4 occurrence, in that event, efforts would have been made to dispose of the dead body with a view to conceal the evidence and the informant would not have been informed. It is next submitted that whenever any dispute arises in between the husband and the wife and occurrence of the nature as alleged takes place, the entire family members are implicated in a mechanical manner with general and omnibus allegations. It is next submitted that the dead body was sent for post-mortem that in itself demonstrates that petitioners were not involved in the occurrence or else they would have made efforts to ensure that the dead body is not sent for post-mortem, as the cause of death would be ascertained.

It is next submitted that a specific pleading has been made at para-9 of the anticipatory bail application wherein it has been pleaded that petitioners being father-in-law and mother-in-law were residing separately from their son and the deceased, i.e., the petitioners were living at village Purani Gauri, P.S. Kalibagh whereas the deceased along with her husband were residing at Khiriya Ghat where the alleged occurrence took place. It is next submitted that merely because the death occurred within seven years of marriage that in itself does not lead to an irresistible conclusion that the death was a dowry death.

4/4 abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence. It is also submitted that the husband of the deceased is in custody.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Bariya P.S. Case No. 92 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T