SEEMA DEVIversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24146 of 2026
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2025 Thana- PUNAURA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
           1.     SEEMA DEVI D/o- Ramji Thakur R/v- Baghmari Ps- Sahiyara Dist-
                  Sitamarhi
           2.    Ramji Thakur S/o- Late Jhapsi Thakur R/v- Baghmari Ps- Sahiyara Dist-
                 Sitamarhi
           3.    Priya Devi @ Priyanka Kumari W/o- Indrajeet Thakur R/v- Baghmari Ps-
                 Sahiyara Dist- Sitamarhi
           4.    Lalpari Devi W/o- Ramji Thakur R/v- Baghmari Ps- Sahiyara Dist-
                 Sitamarhi

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s      :       Mr. Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                                                   Smt. Divya Bharti, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   01-07-2026                    Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                                2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in

                   connection with Punaura P.S. Case No.207 of 2025, F.I.R dated

                   13.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 80 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                                3.      According to prosecution case, the informant's

                   daughter, Priti Kumari, was married to Sujit Kumar on

                   07.05.2025. After the marriage, her husband and in-laws

                   allegedly demanded a motorcycle as dowry and subjected her to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24146 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026
                                            2/4




          physical and mental cruelty for non-fulfilment of the demand.

          Despite a village Panchayati and her temporary return to the

          parental home, she was allegedly sent back to her matrimonial

          house, where the accused persons continued to assault and

          harass her. On 11.09.2025, the informant was asked over phone

          to take his daughter, but upon reaching the matrimonial home,

          he found it locked and the family absconding. Subsequently, her

          dead body was recovered near the bank of a pond, and the

          informant alleged that the accused persons had murdered her on

          account of the dowry demand.

                      4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

          petitioner No.1 is the sister-in-law, petitioner No.2 is the

          grandfather-in-law, petitioner No.3 is the cousin and petitioner

          No.4 is the grandmother-in-law, who have been made accused in

          this case while, the marriage between the husband and the

          deceased daughter of the informant was nullified through

          Panchayat, and the relevant documents has been appended with

          the anticipatory bail application as Annexure-P/2. It has further

          been submitted that case diary was called for along with post

          mortem report and cause of death, which has been indicated in

          the post mortem report, is asphyxia due to drowning and no

          witnesses have recorded their statement with regard to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24146 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026
                                            3/4




          petitioners complicity in causing of death of the deceased.

                      5. Learned APP, by referring to the materials in the

          case diary does not dispute the contention of the learned counsel

          for the petitioners while, he vehemently opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail application on the ground that the deceased has

          died a natural death.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          that complicity of these petitioners, who being the in-laws, some

          of them aged about 65-70 years and nothing specific has

          surfaced during the course of investigation and the petitioners

          are innocent and have no criminal antecedent. Accordingly, this

          Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioners.

                       7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of

          their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period

          of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released

          on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)

          with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

          the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection

          with Punaura P.S. Case No.207 of 2025, subject to the

          conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

          Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24146 of 2026(3) dt.01-07-2026
                                                       4/4




                     Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-

                                  (i) one of the bailors should be the family

                     member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide

                     official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;

                                  (ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every

                     date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two

                     consecutive       dates     without      plausible   reason   will   entail

                     cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

                                  (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or

                     promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,

                     failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for

                     cancellation of the bail bonds;

                                  (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any

                     criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty

                     to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.



                                                   (Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-

U      T