Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Kalpana DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioners subject to the stipulated conditions.

Summary

Kalpana Devi and Niraj Kumar Mandal, mother‑in‑law and husband of Veena Devi respectively, filed a petition fearing arrest in a dowry‑related case registered under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The prosecution alleges that after Veena Devi's marriage in 2020, the petitioners tortured and harassed her for dowry. The petitioners contend that the proceedings stem from a petty family dispute and seek anticipatory bail, relying on a prior Patna High Court decision. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after hearing counsel, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail‑bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners in a case involving alleged dowry harassment and multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Dowry Prohibition Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • dowry harassment
  • family dispute
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Dowry Prohibition Act
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87002 of 2025
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2025 Thana- NAUGACHIA MAHILA P.S. District-
                                                        Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Kalpana Devi W/O Akhilesh Mandal Resident of the village- Telhari,
                  Dimaha, P.S.- Gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur.
           2.    Niraj Kumar Mandal @ Niraj @ Shrawan Kumar Mandal S/O Akhilesh
                 Mandal@Manni Mandal Resident of the village- Telhari, Dimaha, P.S.-
                 Gopalpur, District- Bhagalpur.

                                                                                ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Veena Devi D/O Sadanand Mandal At Present R/at Pakra Tola, P.O.-
                 Bhimdas Tola, P.S.- Gopalpur, Dist.- Bhagalpur

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Ms. Pushpa Sinha, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   30-03-2026                  Despite valid service of notice, none appears on

                   behalf of the opposite party no. 2.

                                2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

                   State.

                                3. The petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 126(2), 115, 82,

                   352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Sections

                   3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

                                4. As per prosecution case, marriage of the opposite

                   party no. 2 was solemnized with petitioner no. 2 in the year
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87002 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026
                                            2/3




          2020 and thereafter, all the F.I.R. named accused persons

          including these petitioners tortured and harassed her due to non-

          fulfillment of demand of dowry.

                       5. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that

          petitioner no. 1 is mother-in-law and petitioner no. 2 happens to

          be husband of the opposite party no. 2 and present case has been

          lodged due to petty family dispute. There is general and

          omnibus allegation of commission of assault against them. It is

          further submitted that petitioner no. 2 is ready to keep the

          opposite party no. 2, as his wife, with full honour and dignity. It

          is next submitted that the case is triable by the Magistrate. In

          this connection, learned counsel for the petitioners has relied

          upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Md. Naimul

          Haque Ansari @ Naimul Haque Ansari & Ors. Vs. The State

          of Bihar, reported in 2006(3) PLJR 182.

                       6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer

          for anticipatory bail of petitioners.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the

          above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender

          within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail

          on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87002 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026
                                                          3/3




                        two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

                        learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Naughachia in

                        connection with Mahila (Naughachia) P. S. Case No. 47 of

                        2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of

                        the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.



                                              (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.