Patna High Court
Anjali Kumari @ Anjali SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Anjali Kumari and her husband Jitendra Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under Sections 85, 123, 80, 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bihar Negotiable (B.N.S.) relating to alleged dowry harassment and the death of a woman. They contended that they have clean antecedents, the informant is not an eyewitness, and the allegations are vague and aimed at coercing the family. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court examined the submissions, noting the petitioners' willingness to cooperate and the lack of concrete evidence linking them directly to the crime. Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with a provision for cancellation if they fail to cooperate.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail in the pending criminal case under Sections 85, 123, 80, 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioners are sufficient to deny bail
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17010 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-749 Year-2025 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Anjali Kumari @ Anjali Singh wife of Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Singh
Resident of village- Chakfateh P.S. - Mahua Dist.- Vaishali
2. Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Singh Son of Nand Lal Singh Resident of
village- Chakfateh P.S. - Mahua Dist.- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 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 85, 123,
80, 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that her daughter was married to Ranjit about an year
and a half back and out of the wedlock, a child was born, but the
accused persons used to torture the victim for non-fulfillment of
dowry demand of Rs.2 lacs, it is further alleged that sister-in-
law of the victim (petitioner no.1) and her husband (petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17010 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
no.2) used to come to the house of the victim and they also
tortured her for non-fulfillment of dowry demand and the victim
used to disclosed about the torture being meted out to her to the
informant, further alleges that informant was informed on
24.09.2025 at 12 Noon that her daughter has been administered
poison and admitted in a hospital at Hajipur, accordingly, she
along with her family members reached the Nursing Home,
where the victim was admitted but the victim was referred to
Patna, it is next alleged that victim died on the way, thus the
police was informed and the police after postmortem handed
over the dead body of the victim.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated
in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that
informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence and the entire
allegation hinges around suspicion. It is also submitted that no
doubt the victim died within an year and a half of marriage. as
such. presumption in law is against the husband of the deceased
and his family members but then as far as petitioners are
concerned, against them the allegation of demand of dowry and
torture is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that
petitioner no.1 is own sister of the husband of the deceased and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17010 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
petitioner no.2 is her husband and they reside separately. It is
next submitted that petitioners have been implicated in the
instant case only with a view to coerce the entire family
members into submission. It is next submitted that whenever
any dispute arises in between the husband and the wife and the
occurrence of the nature as alleged takes place, the entire family
members are implicated in a mechanical manner. It is also
submitted that had the petitioners been involved in the
occurrence then efforts would have been made to dispose of the
dead body with a view to conceal evidence, but then from
perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest
that the victim was taken to hospital at Hajipur, from where, she
was referred to Patna but on the way she died. It is thus
submitted that efforts were made by the family members to save
the victim. It is also submitted that it is the duty of the husband
to ensure the well-being of his wife but if any untoward
occurrence takes place the entire family members in a
mechanical manner gets implicated. It is also submitted that if
privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioners will not
abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17010 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender 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 learned
trial court where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No.749/2025, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioners
despite giving assurance to this court are not co-operating in the
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…