( 2025:JHHC:11487 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 3003 of 2025 ------ Basanti Devi, aged about 55 years, wife of late Parmeshwar Ram, resident of Village-Chanmano, P.O. & P.S.-Jamua, Dist.- Giridih … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Kamdeo Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl. P.P. ------ Order No.02 Dated- 16.04.2025 Heard the parties. The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of bail in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.108 of 2024 registered under sections 498A/304B/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the mother-in-law of Chandani Kumari, caused dowry death of her. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. Drawing attention of this Court to the copy of the certified copy of the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-V, Giridih in Sessions Trial No. 452 of 2024 dated 05.12.2024 in which case, the co-accused-son of the petitioner namely Pintu Ram faced trial but was acquitted; consequent upon the witnesses examined in the case having not supported the case of the prosecution, submits that therein P.W.1-Chandan Kumar who was the brother of the deceased-Chandani Kumari has categorically stated in his cross-examination that the in-laws of the deceased were having cordial relationship with her and P.W.4-Kanchan Devi who was the informant has also stated in her cross- examination that there was cordial relationship between the deceased and her husband and the deceased was never assaulted or tortured nor any demand of dowry was ever made. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 29.01.2025 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 13 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case and further undertakes that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the abovenamed petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class, Giridih, in connection with Jamua P.S. Case No.108 of 2024 with the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the trial of the case and will furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the trial of the case with further condition that he will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Sonu-Gunjan/