Patna High Court
Mina DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bond, sureties and compliance with conditions under the CrPC and BNS.
Summary
The petitioners, Mina Devi, Laxman Mahto and Anesh Mahto, were named in an FIR under Sections 103(1) and 238 read with 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for allegedly demanding dowry that led to the disappearance of the informant's daughter. The petitioners contended that they are merely in‑laws, live separately from the missing woman, have no daily or domestic contact with her, and have clean antecedents. They argued that the dowry demand alleged in the FIR is a vague, omnibus allegation and that the FIR was lodged three days after the disappearance without any substantive explanation. The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the anticipatory bail but could not refute the factual submissions. The Court, after examining the pleadings, held that the allegations were general and prima facie insufficient to deny bail. Consequently, the Court ordered the release of the petitioners on anticipatory bail subject to a bond, sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNS.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners accused under Sections 103(1) and 238 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita in connection with the alleged dowry demand and disappearance of the informant's daughter.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- disappearance
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 103
- Section 238
- CrPC Section 438
- family relations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23148 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-504 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Mina Devi, Wife of Laxman Mahto
2. Laxman Mahto, Son of Chhatu Mahto
3. Anesh Mahto @ Anish Kumar, Son of Laxman Mahto
All are Resident of Village - Gopalpur, P.S. - Sugauli, District - East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Parties
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Tuhin Shankar, Advocate
Mr. Gopal Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
7 08-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State duly
assisted by learned counsel appearing for the informant.
2. The accused/petitioners are named in the FIR and
apprehending their arrest in connection with Sugauli P.S.
Case No.504 of 2024 registered under Sections 103(1) and
238 read with 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (in
short ‘BNS’).
3. Allegation against petitioners is to raise a
demand along with other family members for one Apache
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23148 of 2025(7) dt.08-01-2026
2/4
motorcycle and golden rings and due to non-fulfilment of
same, the daughter of informant was found disappeared from
her matrimonial home since 12.11.2024.
4. It is submitted by Mr. Tuhin Shankar, learned
counsel appearing for the petitioners that the husband of
petitioner is in judicial custody. It is further submitted that
petitioner no.1 is father-in-law and petitioner no.2 is mother-
in-law and petitioner no.3 is brother-in-law, who are living
separately, having no connection with daily and domestic
affairs with the daughter of informant and her husband. It is
submitted that implication of petitioners is only out of
relations and moreover the demand of dowry, which was
raised just to aggravate the allegation is appearing very much
general and omnibus in nature. While concluding argument, it
is pointed out that FIR in issue was lodged after three days of
the missing of the daughter of informant, without having any
explanation and moreover the petitioners are of clean
antecedent.
5. Learned APP duly assisted by Mr. Abhishek
Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the informant while
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23148 of 2025(7) dt.08-01-2026
3/4
opposing the prayer of anticipatory bail could not disputed the
aforesaid factual submissions.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as petitioners are in-laws prima facie
facing general and omnibus allegation as its appear from
facial perusal of FIR itself, who claimed living separately from
deceased daughter of informant and her husband,
accordingly, all three above-named petitioners are directed to
be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender in
the court below within a period of four weeks, on furnishing
bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran at Motihari
in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No.504 of 2024, subject
to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
CrPC/under Section 482(2) of the BNSS and with further
condition:-
(i) That petitioners shall co-operate
in the trial and shall be physically present on
each and every date before the Trial Court till
conclusion of the trial and exemption from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23148 of 2025(7) dt.08-01-2026
4/4
physical appearance be allowed by the Trial
Court only on medical ground of the petitioners
duly supported by the documents.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
Sanjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…