Nanki Ray @ Nanaki Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69418 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-58 Year-2025 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

Nanki Ray @ Nanaki Ray, Male, age about 52 years, Son of Jugeshvar Ray 2.

Shobha Devi @ Suman Devi, Female, aged about 47 years, wife of Nanki Ray @ Nanaki Ray 3.

Radha Devi @ Radha Kumari, Female, aged about 20 years, wife of Ashish Ray, All resident of Village - Vajitpur Meyari, P.S - Sarairanjan, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-02-2026 Heard Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 58 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. corresponding Section 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry of rupees fifty thousand, the petitioners along with other accused persons had allegedly committed murder of the daughter of the informant, whose

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69418 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026 2/3 marriage was solemnized with the son of petitioners no. 1 and 2, namely, Amarjeet Ray, in the year 2019.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioners no. 1 and 2, who are father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased respectively, have also lost their son, who, after the alleged incidence, had committed suicide. Petitioner no. 3 is sister-inlaw of the deceased. Petitioners have clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, the allegation made in the FIR, I find that petitioners no. 1 and 3, who are father-in-law and sister-in-law of the daughter of the informant (deceased) respectively, have prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.

7. The petitioners no. 1 and 3, above named, are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69418 of 2025(5) dt.20-02-2026 3/3 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court where the case is pending, in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 58 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

8. So far as petitioner no. 2, who is mother-in-law of the deceased is concerned, her role in alleged commission of murder of the daughter of the informant cannot be denied, which ultimately led to instigate her son to commit suicide. Accordingly, I am not inclined to enlarge her on pre-arrest bail.

9. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.

10. Accordingly, the present bail application stands disposed of.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Niraj/- U T