Rajesh Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72055 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.
Rajesh Paswan Son of Surendra Paswan Resident of Village - Raypur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur.
2.
Kamla Devi Wife of Surendra Paswan Resident of Village - Raypur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur.
3.
Gunjan Kumari Daughter of Surendra Paswan Resident of Village - Raypur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur.
4.
Surendra Paswan Son of Late Baleshwar Paswan Resident of Village - Raypur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur. 5.
Sangeeta Devi Wife of Rajesh Paswan Resident of Village - Raypur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur.
6.
Vimal Paswan Son of Late Ram Bilash Paswan Resident of Village - Satanpur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur. 7.
Radha Kumari Wife of Vimal Paswan Resident of Village - Satanpur, P.S.- Ujiarpur, District - Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prem Kumar Paswan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Raj Ballabh Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-11-2025 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 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner Nos.
2/4 2, 3, 5 and 7 are women and the informant alleges that her daughter was married to Mukesh on 2-5-2024, after marriage the accused person used to threaten the victim that they will marry Mukesh again if demand of Rs. 2 lakhs is not met, further the victim used to inform the informant about the demand and the informant used to go to the house of the victim and make the accused person understand, further on 22-2-2025, the victim from the room of her parental home called Mukesh on his mobile and talked, thereafter Mukesh called her and informed that the victim has committed suicide, accordingly the informant went to the room and saw the room locked from inside, thereafter the room was broken and they saw the victim hanging from the fan and thereafter they took her to the doctor who disclosed that the victim died, thus alleges that victim committed suicide being fed up with the dowry demand. 4.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the victim committed suicide at her parental home. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would also manifest that the victim prior to committing
3/4 suicide had called Mukesh and it was Mukesh who had asked the informant to go to the room to see what was happening. It is next submitted that the petitioners, who are in-laws, brother-inlaw and sister-in-law, have been implicated only to coerce Mukesh into submission. It is also submitted that whenever any dispute in between husband and the wife occurs, 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 submitted that allegation of demand of dowry is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that had the victim been fed up with the dowry demand made by the accused persons, in that event she would not have come to her parental home for committing the occurrence.
It is also submitted that it is the duty of the husband to ensure the well-being of his wife. It is next submitted that petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence. It is further submitted that husband is not the petitioner in the instant anticipatory bail application.
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
4/4 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 Dalsingh Sarai P.S. Case No. 63 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 the petitioners, despite giving assurance to this Court, are not cooperating 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. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T