Sudama Giri v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88707 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Sudama Giri Son of Jairam Giri Resident of Village- Bahuara Mathiya, P.S.- Suruapura, District- Rohtas at Sasaram 2.

Subhanti Devi Wife of Sudama Giri Resident of Village- Bahuara Mathiya, P.S.- Suruapura, District- Rohtas at Sasaram ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 19-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This the second attempt of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail. Earlier vide order dated 19.09.2025, after some arguments, the prayer for anticipatory bail was dismissed as withdrawn.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has pointed out that other co-accused have already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.67833 of 2025 with Cr. Misc. No.68101 of 2025 (Annexure-3 to this petition), however on perusal of the same, it would reveal that even in the said

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88707 of 2025(2) dt.19-12-2025 2/2 order it has been stated that the thrust of the allegation is upon the husband, father-in-law and the mother-in-law. The petitioners are father-in-law and mother-in-law and the other accused, who had been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court had mediated the marriage. As such, the petitioners are not similarly situated with the coaccused who have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 02.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.67833 of 2025 with Cr. Misc. No.68101 of 2025 (Annexure-3 to this petition).

4. In such view of the matter, this application is dismissed with a clarification that the liberty earlier granted to the petitioners vide order dated 19.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.66127 of 2025 would still stand with the additional fact that the co-accused persons have also now been granted anticipatory bail.

(Soni Shrivastava, J) Trivedi/- U T