Patna High Court
Ranjan PanditversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The court held that, notwithstanding the serious allegations, the petitioners were entitled to anticipatory bail subject to the conditions prescribed under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Ranjan Pandit and Khushboo Devi, elder brother‑in‑law and sister‑in‑law of a deceased woman, were implicated in a case (Manpur P.S. Case No. 139 of 2025) alleging assault, attempted murder and dowry‑related offences under several sections of the B.N.S. and the Dowry Prohibition Act. They applied for anticipatory bail, contending that the allegations were vague, they had no criminal antecedent and were not involved in the daily affairs of the deceased. The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, opposed the bail on the ground of the seriousness of the charges. The Court examined the record, noted the petitioners’ claim of separation from the alleged victim and the lack of specific evidence linking them to the crime, and applied the provisions of section 482(2) of the B.N.S. The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to a bail‑bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties each, and imposed standard conditions. The application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109(1), 61(2), 85, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioners are sufficiently specific to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioners’ lack of prior criminal record and claimed non‑involvement justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 3(5), 61(2), 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- section 482
- B.N.S.
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- assault
- attempted murder
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35150 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2025 Thana- MANPUR District- Nalanda
======================================================
1. Ranjan Pandit S/O Ganauri Pandit Resident of Village- Tiuri, P.S.- Manpur,
District- Nalanda
2. Khushboo Devi @ Khushboo Kumari W/O Ranjan Pandit Resident of
Village- Tiuri, P.S.- Manpur, District- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anjani Parashar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 21-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video
conferencing.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a
case in connection with Manpur P.S. Case No. 139 of 2025
dated 10.09.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109(1), 61(2), 85, and 3(5) of
the B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. As per the allegation, the marriage of the daughter
of the informant was performed two years ago. It has been
alleged that on 20.08.2025 at 06:00 P.M., the informant got a
telephonic call from her daughter who stated that petitioners
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35150 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
2/3
along with other family members including her husband are
assaulting her with a purpose to kill. Upon such information, the
informant went to the matrimonial house of her daughter and
saw that co-accused Manwi Kumari, who happens to be the
sister-in-law of her daughter, is pressing the neck by mean of
‘dupatta’. It has further been alleged that informant took her
daughter to P.M.C.H., Patna, where treatment was being done
and her condition was very critical.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted
that petitioners happens to be the elder brother-in-law and elder
sister-in-law respectively of the deceased. It has further been
submitted that the allegation against the petitioners are general
and omnibus in nature. Learned counsel for the petitioners has
further submitted that the husband of the deceased, namely
Devraj Kumar, is in judicial custody and a statement to this
effect has been made in Paragraph-5 of the anticipatory bail
application. It has further been submitted that the petitioners
reside separately in mess and residence and had got no concern
with the daily affairs of the deceased or her husband. It has
lastly been submitted that petitioners have got no criminal
antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35150 of 2026(2) dt.21-05-2026
3/3
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Heard the parties and perused the record.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their
arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be
enlarged on anticipatory bail 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 A.C.J.M. II,
Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with Manpur P.S. Case No.
139 of 2025, subject to conditions as laid down under section
482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.