Raj Kumar Rajbanshi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89788 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-438 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.
Raj Kumar Rajbanshi S/o- Late Jamuna Rajbanshi Vill - Jogiyamaran, P.S - Rajauli, Dist - Nawada 2.
Muniya Devi W/o- Raj Kumar Rajbanshi Vill - Jogiyamaran, P.S - Rajauli, Dist - Nawada 3.
Runi Devi @ Renu Devi W/o- Tuntun Rajbanshi Vill - Khanpur, P.S - Hisua, Dist - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Birendra Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 438 of 2025 dated 12.08.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 80(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per prosecution case, the accusation against the accused persons including the petitioners is of committing murder of the deceased for non-fulfillment of the dowry demand.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.1 and 2 are father-in-law and mother-in-law whereas petitioner no.3 is the married Nanad of the deceased. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89788 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 2/3 is next submitted that there is nothing specific against the petitioners rather the allegations levelled against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature. In the postmortem report, the cause of death has been shown as asphyxia due to hanging.
5. It is the case of the petitioners that it is they who have informed the Informant's family regarding the alleged incident, which is said to have taken place. It has next been submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedent and they are living separately and have got no concern with the affairs of the deceased and her husband.
6. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the nature of allegation leveled against the petitioners which is general and omnibus and nothing specific has surfaced against them during investigation, this Court is inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
8. Accordingly, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89788 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 3/3 with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 438 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall who shall provide official document / personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their bail bonds by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) rishi/- U T