Patna High CourtCR. MISC./89123/2025bail granted

Rekha Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-12Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89123 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2025 Thana- NOWKOTHI GARHPURA DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== Rekha Devi W/o Ranvir Singh R/o vill - Chak-Muzaffar, P.S.- Naokothi, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-01-2026 Heard Mr.Shubhesh Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Naokothi P.S. Case No.143 of 2025, dated 02.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 61(2),103,3(5) of BNS, 2023.

3. As per FIR, allegation against the petitioner is that he alongwith other co-accused persons started torturing the daughter of the informant and demanded Rs. Two Lacs as dowry. It is further alleged that on 29.06.2025, all the accused persons including the petitioner has killed the daughter of the informant.

2/4

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and she has been made accused in the present case merely on the ground that she is mother-in-law of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the date of occurrence as alleged in the FIR is 29.06.2025 and the postmortem was conducted on 30.06.2025 but the present FIR has been instituted after the postmortem i.e. on 02.07.2025 which suggests that the present FIR has been instituted afterthought only to falsely implicated the petitioner and her family members and son of the petitioner, who happens to be the husband of the deceased, is in custody since 07.09.2025 and there is no specific allegation of any assault, overt-act or demand of dowry attributed against the petitioner in the FIR.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioner has clean antecedent, there is no specific allegation of any assault, overtact or demand of dowry attributed against the petitioner in the FIR and son of the petitioner, who happens to be the husband

3/4 of the deceased, is in custody since 07.09.2025, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.F.C., Begusarai in connection with Naokothi P.S. Case No.143 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS,2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Nitesh/- U T