Patna High Court
Munna Petiwala @ Md. MunnaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail, subject to the stipulated bond and conditions, as the allegations do not preclude the grant of bail.
Summary
The petitioners, nine relatives of a deceased woman, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a dowry‑death case (Sugauli P.S. Case No. 488 of 2024) filed under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR alleged that the deceased was tortured for dowry and later died, with the husband already in judicial custody. The petitioners contended they were innocent, had clean records, and were being implicated merely as relatives of the prime accused. The State opposed bail, arguing the allegations were serious. The Court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to a bond of Rs 30,000 each and conditions under Section 2(1)(d) and Section 482(2) of the BNS, 2023, and warned that bail could be cancelled if charges are framed and they fail to appear.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in the present dowry‑death case.
- Whether the nature of the allegations under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 justifies denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 2(1)(d), 3(5), 482(2), 80
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- criminal procedure
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 80
- Section 3(5)
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21945 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-488 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Munna Petiwala @ Md. Munna Son of Izhar Hussain Resident of Village-
Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
2. Chanda Khatoon Wife of Sharukh Alam @ Sharukh Ali Resident of Village-
Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
3. Saira Khatoon wife of Munna Petiwala @ Md. Munna Resident of Village-
Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
4. Sabba Khatoon @ Sabba Wife of Farukh Alam @ Faruk ali Resident of
Village- Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
5. Sharukh Alam @ Sharukh Ali Son of Munna Petiwala @ Md. Munna
Resident of Village- Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
6. Shabaz Alam @ Sahbaj Ali Son of Munna Petiwala @ Md. Munna Resident
of Village- Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
7. Farukh Alam @ Faruk Ali Son of Munna Petiwala @Md. Munna Resident
of Village- Hasanpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran
8. Sabnam Khatoon @ Ruksana Khatoon @ Shabnam @ Ruksana Daughter of
Munna Petiwala @ Md. Munna Resident of Village- Hasanpur, P.S.-
Sugauli, District- East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 488 of 2024, dated
04.11.2024, lodged under Sections 80 & 3(5) of the Bhartiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”).
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21945 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged
against nine named accused persons, including the present
petitioners, stating that the marriage of the informant’s daughter
was solemnized with one Shaif Alam, and she was subjected to
torture for the demand of dowry. It has been further alleged that
although the informant’s side assured to make payment of Rs.
5,00,000/- in future, but before that his daughter was no more,
and by the time he reached there, the dead body was disposed
of.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel further submits that the husband of the deceased, who
is the prime accused, is already in judicial custody, and the rest
of the persons are relatives of the deceased’s husband, and due
to this reason, they have been made accused. Counsel further
submits that the trial is going on. Counsel also submits that the
criminal antecedents of the petitioners are clean.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners but fairly submits that the deceased’s
husband is in judicial custody and the allegations are general
and omnibus in nature.
6. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21945 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
this case, let the above named petitioners be released on
anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the
Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing
bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) each as
mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the
satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Motihari, in
connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 488 of 2024, subject to
the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
7. It is made clear that if the charge has not been
framed and the petitioners fail to appear on the date of framing
of charge, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…