Parvati Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62831 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2025 Thana- LAUKARIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Parvati Devi W/o Gabbar @ Krishna Yadav @ Gabbar Yadav R/o VillageJarar, PS- Laukariya, Dist- West Champaran 2.
Arti Kumari D/o Gabbar @ Krishna Yadav @ Gabbar Yadav R/o VillageJarar, PS- Laukariya, Dist- West Champaran 3.
Sita Kumari @ Rachna Kumari D/o Gabbar @ Krishna Yadav @ Gabbar Yadav R/o Village- Jarar, PS- Laukariya, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Prerna Anand, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== 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 BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are women and the informant alleges that his daughter was married to Rahul on 26.02.2024, after marriage, the accused persons including the petitioners were demanding dowry of Rs. 4 Lakhs and a vehicle, further on 27.05.2025, the informant was informed that his
2/4 daughter has been killed by the accused persons, accordingly he came to the place of occurrence and saw the dead body of his daughter and none of the accused were present in the house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case based on suspicion. It is next submitted that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. It is also submitted that demand of dowry and torture is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that no doubt the daughter of the informant died within seven years of marriage, as such, presumption in law is against the husband of the deceased and his family members, but then all deaths are not dowry deaths. It is also submitted that whenever any dispute arises in between the husband and wife and the 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 further submitted that the postmortem report records the cause of death as asphyxia due to strangulation, but then it is submitted that it is not possible that all the accused persons were involved in strangulating the deceased. It is also submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R.
3/4 occurrence, he saw the dead body of his daughter lying and accused persons were not present, it is submitted that had the petitioners been involved in the occurrence, in that event efforts would have been made to dispose of the dead body with a view to conceal evidence, but then the same was not done. It is also submitted that since on account of dispute in between the husband and the wife, the occurrence took place, as such, natural reaction of other family members was to leave the place of occurrence. It is next submitted that petitioner no. 1 is mother-in-law and petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are unmarried sisterin-law of the deceased. The learned counsel asserts and submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will co-operate in the investigation to prove their innocence.
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
4/4 the case is pending/successor court in connection with Laukaria P.S. Case No. 61 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned Trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioners despite giving assurance to this Court are not co-operating in the investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
8. Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned police station through the learned Trial Court.
9. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T