Patna High Court
Manaini Devi @ Anita DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Manaini Devi, the mother‑in‑law of the deceased, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a dowry‑death case (Sections 304B and 34 IPC) concerning the death of her daughter‑in‑law, who was found near a well. The petitioner argued that she has a clean record, the informant is not an eye‑witness, and the allegations are based solely on suspicion and generic dowry‑related accusations. The State opposed the bail, contending that the informant’s observations and the circumstances of the death create a presumption against the husband’s family and that the investigation is ongoing. The court examined the material on record, noting the lack of direct evidence linking the petitioner to the crime and the reliance on conjecture. However, the court held that the seriousness of the offences and the continuing investigation warranted denial of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the anticipatory bail application was rejected.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner in a case involving alleged dowry death under Sections 304B and 34 IPC.
- Whether the material on record, primarily based on suspicion and non‑eyewitness testimony, is sufficient to justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304B, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- Section 304B IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- criminal procedure
- suspicion
- bail denial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7035 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2024 Thana- RAJGIR District- Nalanda
======================================================
Manaini Devi @ Anita Devi W/o Chhotan Chaudhary R/o Village - Visthapit
Nagdeeh, P.S - Rajgir, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rana Baljit Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection
with Rajgir P.S. Case No. 37 of 2024 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that his daughter was married to Hira about two years
back, on 31.01.2024 he received an information that his
daughter died by jumping in the well, accordingly he reached
the place of occurrence and saw the dead body of his daughter
lying near the well, further her bangles were broken and cloths
were dried, thus, alleges based on suspicion that seven named
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7035 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
accused persons including the petitioner killed his daughter as
he was not able to fulfill the demand of motorcycle and money.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner, being mother-in-law, has been falsely implicated in
the instant case by the informant, it is next submitted that
informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence and the entire
allegation hinges around suspicion. It is further submitted that
informant in the FIR alleges that he received an information that
his daughter died by jumping in the well and her dead body was
also found near the well. It is further submitted that allegation of
demand of dowry and torture is general and omnibus in nature.
It is next submitted that whenever any dispute arises in between
the husband and the wife and the occurrence of the nature as
alleged takes place, the entire family members are implicated in
a mechanical manner with general and omnibus allegations.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes
the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits
that though informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence,
but then his daughter was married to Hira about two years back
and within seven years of marriage, the occurrence took place
and in law also the presumption is against the husband and his
family members. It is also submitted that if the FIR is perused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7035 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
carefully, it would manifest that the informant alleges that when
he reached the place of occurrence, he saw the dead body of his
daughter lying near the well with bangles broken and the cloths
were dried, it is thus submitted that it does not appear probable
that she jumped in the well and committed suicide. It is also
submitted that investigation in the case is continuing and how
the victim died requires to be investigated.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…