Patna High Court
Lalan PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The anticipatory bail application is allowed.
Summary
The petitioners, Lalan Prasad and his wife Renu Devi, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 69, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., alleging that they were falsely implicated by the informant, who claimed her son’s suicide and subsequent family disputes. The petitioners argued that they have clean antecedents, that the informant’s statements are contradictory, and that the case is an attempt to coerce them into a property settlement. The State and the informant opposed the bail but could not refute the petitioners’ claim that there was no likelihood of them tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The Court examined the merits of the anticipatory bail application, the nature of the allegations, and the provisions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. for granting bail. It directed that the petitioners be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing bail bonds and sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 482(2). The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners in view of the allegations under Sections 126(2),115(2),85,69,351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the petitioners are likely to tamper with evidence, influence witnesses or commit any offence if arrested
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(2), 482(2), 69, 85
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- section 482
- Bihar criminal law
- family dispute
- dowry
- suicide
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16722 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Lalan Prasad S/O Late Bhagelu Sah R/O Village- Chuhari, Police station-
Chanpatiya, District- West Champaran.
2. Renu Devi W/O Lalan Prasad R/O Village- Chuhari, Police station-
Chanpatiya, District- West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Brij Kishor Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar
Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey
Mr.Satyam Kumar Ojha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the informant.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 69, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioner no.1 is a person with clean antecedent and
petitioner no.2 has antecedent of one case and is a woman and
the informant alleges that she was married to Manish Kumar on
20.05.2023 and out of the wedlock, a boy was born, but Manish
committed suicide on 13.10.2024 as his parents used to torture
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16722 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/4
him. Further, the accused persons pressurized the informant not
to institute a case as she will be married to her brother in-law,
hence the informant changed her statement in the case instituted
by the police and started staying with her brother in-law. It is
next alleged that her brother in-law started establishing physical
relation, but then, at that time she was already pregnant and
subsequently, a girl child was born, but her brother in-law
resiled from marrying and the accused kept her children and
ousted her from the house and even demanded dowry.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant being father in-law and mother in-law. It is next
submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the
FIR, it would manifest that a bezaar allegation has been alleged
that the son of the petitioners namely Manish committed suicide
on account of torture being meted out to him by them. It is
further submitted that no parents can indulge in an act where
they compel their own son to commit suicide. It is also
submitted that if what has been alleged in the instant FIR is a
correct fact, then why the informant changed her statement in
the case which was instituted by the police with regard to death
of Manish. It is further submitted that it might be a possibility
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16722 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/4
that Manish committed suicide on account of torture being
meted out by the informant. It is next submitted that from
perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that informant alleges that on account of assurance
given by the petitioners that she will get married to her brother-
in-law, she changed her statement in a court of law, but then,
that is not a fact and is an aspect of investigation. It is further
submitted that two children were born out of the wedlock of the
informant with Manish and the girl child presently is of tender
age, as such, is staying with the informant and the instant case
has been instituted only with a view to coerce the petitioners
into submission so that they divide the property. It is also
submitted that it is not in dispute that the property belongs to the
children of Manish and even informant has her share.
5. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory
bail application, but then, are not in a position to rebut the
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners that it does not appear probable that had Manish
committed suicide on account of torture being meted out by the
petitioners, in that event, the informant would not have
disclosed the same merely on an assurance she would get
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16722 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
4/4
married to her brother in-law.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on
anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum 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
Chanpatiya P. S. Case No.185 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…