IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58846 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-641 Year-2024 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1. Ranjeet Kumar son of Siya Sharan Chaudhary Village- Bandeya Tola Mali Bagleha, P.s.-Makhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad 2. Rajesh chaudhary @ Rajesh Kumar son of Siya Sharan Chaudhary Village- Bandeya Tola Mali Bagleha, P.s.-Makhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad 3. Devanti Devi wife of siya Sharan chaudhary Village- Bandeya Tola Mali Bagleha, P.s.-Makhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad 4. Garivan yadav @ Satyendra yadav son of Late Madho Yadav Village- Bandeya Tola Mali Bagleha, P.s.-Makhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad 5. Subhash yadav son Of Late Banshi Yadav Village- Bandeya Tola Mali Bagleha, P.s.-Makhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad 6. Siya Sharan Chaudhary son of Late Jageshwar Chaudhary Village- Bandeya Tola Mali Bagleha, P.s.-Makhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad 7. Chamani Chaudhary @ Binesh Chaudhary son of Late Panchu chaudhary Village- vishunganj, Ps- Vishunganj, Dist- Jehanabad 8. Muni Devi wife of Chamani chaudhary @ Binesh chaudhary Village- vishunganj, Ps- Vishunganj, Dist- Jehanabad 9. Anju Devi @ Anju Kumari Wife of Niraj chaudhary village- Madarpur, Ward no. 6, Jehanabad, Ps- Jehanabad, Dist- jehanabad 10. Manju Devi Wife of Late Shailesh chaudhary @ Late Jalesh Chaudhary village- Unta (Village- Madarpur Wrongly mentioned in the Impugned Order) , Ward no. 6, Jehanabad, Ps- Jehanabad, Dist- jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Fahimuddin, APP Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58846 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 2/5 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 09-09-2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80, 238 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner no. 4 has antecedent of one case and other petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that the informant alleges that his sister was married to Rakesh on 07.03.2024 and after marriage the victim gave birth to a child, it is also alleged that Rakesh used to quarrel with the victim and demanded jewellery, it is next alleged that on 27.12.2024 at about 05:00 AM the informant got an information about the death of his sister and accordingly, he reached the place of occurrence when he found the house of the victim locked and nobody was present, on inquiry the villagers disclosed that the dead body of his sister was cremated near a river and accordingly the informant went to the place where the dead body was being cremated and some part of the body was Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58846 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 3/5 recovered with soil. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that husband of the deceased is in custody. It is next submitted that petitioner nos. 1 and 2 are brother-in-laws while petitioner no. 3 is mother-in-law of the deceased. It is further submitted that petitioner nos. 4 and 5 are neighbours of the deceased while petitioner nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are father-in-law and Nandosi and married sister-in-laws respectively. It is next submitted that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges around suspicion. It is next submitted that the allegation of demand of dowry and torture is also general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that whenever any occurrence of the nature as alleged takes place, the entire family members are implicated in a mechanical manner with general and omnibus allegation. It is next submitted that even neighbours and married sister of the husband of the deceased along with their husbands have been implicated when they do not reside with the husband of the deceased. It is thus submitted that only to coerce the husband and other family members who are residing in the house into submission, the entire family members have been implicated along with the neighbours. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58846 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 4/5 the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that what is not in dispute rather stands admitted is that sister of the informant died, it is next submitted that whether the death was suicidal or homicidal could have been ascertained only when the postmortem of the dead body would have been conducted. It is also submitted that it is not possible for the husband of the deceased to cremate the dead body singly. It is next submitted that investigating of the case is continuing. 6. After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6. 7. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected with respect to petitioner nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6. 8. So far as other petitioners are concerned, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioner nos. 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 and 10 above-named, in the event of their 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. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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 Makhdumpur P.S. Case No. 641 of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58846 of 2025(2) dt.09-09-2025 5/5 2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. 9. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands partly allowed. Rishabh/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T