Patna High Court
Gudiya Kumari @ Gudiya DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners—Gudiya Kumari, Mohan Kumar, Sunil Kumar and Indrashan Devi—were implicated in a dowry death case registered under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. They argued that they had no direct involvement, that the informant was not an eye‑witness, and that the allegations against them were vague and based only on familial relations to the deceased. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, contending that the accused were part of the alleged conspiracy. The High Court, noting the general and omnibus nature of the accusation, the petitioners' clean antecedents and lack of specific incriminating acts, allowed anticipatory bail. The order directed that each petitioner furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to persons accused under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the IPC in a dowry death case.
- Whether the allegations against the petitioners are sufficiently specific to deny bail.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedents and lack of direct involvement justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 304B, 34
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry death
- IPC 304B
- IPC 201
- IPC 34
- Section 482 CrPC
- High Court
- bail conditions
- clean antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82962 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-285 Year-2022 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR RAIL P.S. District-
Saran
======================================================
1. Gudiya Kumari @ Gudiya Devi W/O Mohan Kumar @ Mohan Kumar
Mahto Resident of Village- Tepri @ Hansanagar, P.S.- Piar, District-
Muzaffarpur.
2. Mohan Kumar @ Mohan Kumar Mahto S/O Bhonulal Mahto Resident of
Village- Tepri @ Hansanagar, P.S.- Piar, District- Muzaffarpur.
3. Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Singh S/O Raj Kumar Singh Resident of Village-
Sarmastpur, P.S.- Sakara, District- Muzaffarpur.
4. Indrashan Devi W/O Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Singh Resident of Village-
Sarmastpur, P.S.- Sakara, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioners : Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate
Ms. Kumari Seema Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B, 201
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is a case of dowry death. As per prosecution case,
informant alleged that marriage of her daughter was solemnized
with co-accused Arun Singh in the year 2021 as per Hindu rites
and rituals and thereafter, all the F.I.R. named accused persons,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82962 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
including these petitioners, committed torture and harassment
with the victim due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and
subsequently, all the accused persons committed murder of the
victim.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
have committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to
the occurrence. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in this
case merely because Petitioner No. 1 happens to be married
sister-in-law Petitioner No. 2 happens to be brother-in-law,
Petitioner Nos. 3 and 4 happen to be Bhaisur and Gotani of the
deceased. Petitioners are separate in mess and property and have
got no concern with the affairs of the deceased and her husband.
Allegation of demand of dowry is general and omnibus and no
specific accusation of overt act has been alleged against these
petitioners. Thrust of accusation is against husband of deceased
who is already in custody since 08.01.2026. Petitioners claim
clean antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioners.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82962 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
case, general and omnibus nature of accusation and clean
antecedents of the petitioners, the prayer for grant of
anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within
a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named
petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.
10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned R.J.M., Sonepur,
District- Saran in connection with Muzaffarpur Rail P.S. Case
No. 285 of 2022, subject to condition as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…