Patna High Court
Ranjo DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S.S. as they have no direct involvement in the alleged offences.
Summary
The petitioners Ranjo Devi, Sanni Deval and Deependra Mandal sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a dowry‑related case (PS No.100 of 2025) where they were alleged to be involved in offences under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the deceased’s sister was tortured for dowry and later died, implicating the petitioners by familial connection. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated, had no role in the matrimonial affairs, and possessed clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., directing bail bonds and sureties, and ordered verification of antecedents. The application was thereafter disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the petitioners have any direct involvement in the alleged dowry‑related offences warranting denial of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 3(5), 80
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.S.
- bail conditions
- Bihar criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85630 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2025 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Ranjo Devi W/O Ram Pravesh Mandal R/O Vill.- Durgapur, Ward no. 4,
P.S.- Puraini, Dist.- Madhepura
2. Sanni Deval @ Sunil Kumar S/O Ram Pravesh Mandal R/O Vill.- Durgapur,
Ward no. 4, P.S.- Puraini, Dist.- Madhepura
3. Deependra Mandal @ Bipendra Kumar S/O Ram Pravesh Mandal R/O Vill.-
Durgapur Ward no. 4, P.S.- Puraini, Dist.- Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Pooja Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Puraini P.S. Case No. 100 of 2025 registered for the
offences under Sections 80, 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that his sister was married to one Mukesh Mandal and
that she was mentally and physically tortured for demand of
dowry. It is further alleged that the informant later received a
phone call from the villagers informing him that his sister had
died.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85630 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submit that the petitioners have falsely been
implicated in the present case and that they have no concern
whatsoever with the internal family affairs of the accused
Mukesh Mandal. It has further been submitted that petitioner no.
1 happens to be the cousin sister-in-law of the deceased and
petitioner nos. 2 and 3 are the cousin brothers-in-law of the
deceased. It has also been submitted that the husband of the
deceased was residing separately and that these petitioners had
no role in or connection with the matrimonial life of the
deceased. It has further been submitted that the husband of the
deceased is already in custody and that during the course of
investigation, no specific overt act has been attributed to the
petitioners. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners carry
clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and
circumstances of the case, let the petitioners above named be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85630 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Puraini P.S. Case
No. 100 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to
the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be
their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present
in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or
in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of
the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the
Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned 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 antecedents, the court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85630 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond
of the petitioner. 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.
7. Accordingly, the present application stands
disposed of.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U
Checking your session…