Patna High Court
Prakash SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted to the petitioners as there is no specific allegation against them and they possess a clean antecedent.
Summary
The petitioners, Prakash Singh and his wife Reena Devi, applied for bail in a case alleging they participated in the killing of a girl over a dowry demand of Rs. 5 lakh. The FIR, filed under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, named them merely because of their relationship to the deceased, with no specific allegation of assault, overt act, or dowry demand against them. The petitioners argued they have a clean antecedent and were falsely implicated. The prosecution opposed bail, but the court noted the lack of specific charges and the petitioners' clean record. Consequently, the court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 each with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 in view of the allegations of dowry‑related homicide.
- Whether the absence of specific allegations against the petitioners in the FIR justifies bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent warrants the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80
Subjects
- bail
- dowry death
- Section 80
- Section 3(5)
- clean antecedent
- criminal procedure
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4162 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-268 Year-2025 Thana- SONO District- Jamui
======================================================
1. Prakash Singh S/O Nagina Singh R/O Village- Sono, P.S.- Sono, District-
Jamui
2. Reena Devi @ Rina Devi W/O Prakash Singh R/O Village- Sono, P.S.-
Sono, District- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niranjan Parihar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard Mr. Niranjan Parihar, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Kalyan Shankar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail, who are in custody since
16.09.2025 in connection with Sono P.S. Case No. 268 of 2025,
F.I.R. dated 15.09.2025 for the offences punishable under
Section 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioners and other
co-accused persons are alleged to have killed the daughter of the
informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 5 Lakhs as a
dowry.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4162 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that
petitioners have been made accused in this case merely on the
ground that petitioner no. 1 is father-in-law and petitioner no. 2
is mother-in-law of the deceased. From a bare perusal of FIR, it
appears that the informant is not the eye-witness of the alleged
occurrence and there is no specific allegation of any assault,
overt act or demand of dowry attributed against the petitioners
rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the
accused persons including these petitioners and the husband of
the deceased, namely, Amarjeet Singh who happens to be son of
the petitioners is in judicial custody since 16.09.2025 and the
police after investigation, submitted chargesheet against the
petitioners and the petitioners are in custody since 16.09.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and also the fact that petitioners have clean
antecedent and there is no specific allegation of any assault,
overt act or demand of dowry attributed against the petitioners
in the FIR, let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4162 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned A.C.J.M. IInd, Jamui in connection with Sono P.S.
Case No. 268 of 2025, with the following conditions:
i. Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioners tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…