Babu Ram Gour v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69544 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2025 Thana- Madhubani T District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.
Babu Ram Gour S/o- Late Harilal Gour R/ Village- Madhubani Colony Ward no 1 PS-Madhubani District- Purnea 2.
Ranjana Devi W/o- Babu Ram Gour R/ Village- Madhubani Colony Ward no 1 PS-Madhubani District- Purnea 3.
Bina Devi W/o- Late Harilal Gour R/ Village- Madhubani Colony Ward no 1 PS-Madhubani District- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Bidhu Ranjan, Adv.
Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-10-2025 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioners seek bail in connection with Madhubani P.S. Case No. 161 of 2025, registered for the offences under Sections 80, 85, 238, 351(2), 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, the daughter of the informant died in her matrimonial home under suspicious condition within seven years of marriage. The allegation against the petitioners who are in laws of the deceased is that they along with other co-accused persons have been torturing the daughter
2/4 of the informant and have been demanding fridge, washing machine, cash etc. Further allegation is that the petitioners and co-accused killed the daughter of the informant by strangulating her.
4. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioners never demanded any dowry and never tortured the daughter of the informant. The petitioners were living separately from the coaccused husband of the deceased and have no concern with the domestic affairs of the deceased and her husband. The allegation of demand of dowry is vague and non-specific but husband of the deceased had given a loan of Rs. 2 lakh to the father of the deceased and the same was not being repaid. A quarrel used to take place between husband and wife and in an impulsive manner the deceased committed suicide. The petitioners have no role in the said occurrence. The husband of the deceased is already in custody. Learned senior counsel further submits inquest report shows the death occurred due to strangulation but from the post mortem report it appears the opinion has been reserved regarding cause of death awaiting histopathological examination. The petitioners are in custody since 14.06.2025
3/4 and they have no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioners.
6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the relationship of the petitioners with the deceased and further considering their clean antecedent and period of custody, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Purnea/concerned court, in connection with Madhubani P.S. Case No. 161 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the below, if so required by the learned trial court.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the
4/4 terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Anuradha/- U T