Rani Devi @ Rani Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87787 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2025 Thana- JAKKANPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Rani Devi @ Rani Kumari Wife of Late Binod Prasad @ Late Binod Kumar Resident of village- Khasmahal Road, Ps- Jakkanpur, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Avinash Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 80(2), 108 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter was married to Ranveer in the year 2024, but after marriage, the accused persons started demanding dowry of rupees one lakh and for non-fulfillment of the demand, the victim was tortured physically and mentally, further on 02.06.2025 at about 08:00 PM, villagers informed him that his daughter has died and when he reached the place of occurrence on receiving the information, he saw the dead body of his
2/4 daughter lying in the verandah, it is also alleged that his daughter was pregnant and she was assaulted and her hair was cut by the family members two days' prior to the occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. It is also submitted that though informant alleges that two days' prior to the occurrence his daughter was assaulted and her hair was cut, but then no FIR came to be instituted.
It is next submitted that no doubt the victim died within seven years of marriage and presumption in law is against the husband and his family members, but then had the petitioner been involved in the occurrence, in that event efforts would have been made to dispose of the dead body with a view to conceal the evidence, but then the dead body was lying in the house and the same was sent for postmortem for ascertaining the cause of death. It is also submitted that the postmortem report records asphyxia due to ante mortem hanging by ligature.
3/4 sheet the police has added Section 108 BNS which corroborates Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. It is next submitted that whenever any dispute arises in between the husband and the 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 even allegation of demand of dowry and torture is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove her innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her 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. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) 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 Jakkanpur P.S. Case No. 402 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.
4/4
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 petitioner despite giving assurance to this Court is not co-operating in the investigation, in that event the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
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