2025:JHHC:13265 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5957 of 2024 ----- 1. Shivlal Mahto @ Shivlal Prasad Mehta aged about 60 years S/o – Late Mulo Mahato 2. Draupadi devi @ Dropadi Devi aged about 52 years W/o – Shivlal Mahto both Resident of village- Kaladwar, P.O- Barkakhurd, P.S.- Ichak, District- Hazaribagh …. Petitioner(s) Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Kapildeo Pd. Mehta aged about 51 years S/o- Kedar Mahto, Village – Barwa, P.O and P.S – Ichak, District- Hazaribagh … Opp. Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Sushma Aind, Advocate …...... 04/ 01.05.2025: Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State. 2. The present anticipatory bail application under Sections 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioners apprehending their arrest for the offences registered under Section 304-B/34 of Indian Penal Code, presently pending in the Learned Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hazaribagh in connection with Ichak Police Station Case No. 62 of 2024. 3. The allegations levelled against the petitioners is that the deceased was being subjected to mental and physical cruelty by them and their son after marriage, for demand of dowry. On April 19, 2022, the deceased went to attend a wedding and later returned to her parents’ home. After returning she stated to her mother that her husband was beating her for not bringing more dowry and was threatening to kill her and marry someone else. After that her neighbors informed the informant that his daughter had died by strangulation and her in-laws had fled away. When informant and his family reached the house, they found her dead on the bed and there was bleeding from her nose. She was taken to S.B.M.C.H Hospital in Hazaribagh, where doctors declared her dead. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the allegation made is false and motivated, as there is a difference in the reported cause of death. While the FIR and witness statements mention it strangulation, the post-mortem report states the cause as death by hanging. The informant accused the in-laws of repeatedly abusing the deceased and claims that several time Panchayati was held, but there is no such document in the record and no complain in any police station or in court have ever before this incident. 5. The learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. She submits that the petitioners are not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail. 6. After hearing the parties, and perusing the materials available on record, I find that the petitioners are the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased. The allegation against these petitioners are general in nature. Further there is no evidence of any act attributed to them in the alleged incident. Further from the record I also find that husband of the deceased was acquitted from the charges by the trial court. 7. In view of the aforesaid fact, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioners, above named, are directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of their surrender or arrest, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Learned Court of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hazaribagh in connection with Ichak Police Station Case No. 62 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioners and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his name or in the name of his ancestors in which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property. (ANANDA SEN, J.) R.S/