Patna High Court
Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, a brother-in-law and two sister-in-laws, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with an anti‑PS case alleging dowry harassment and the death of a family member. The prosecution’s case is based on a complaint that the deceased was assaulted by her husband and in‑laws and later died under suspicious circumstances, with the petitioners allegedly involved. The petitioners contended that no harassment complaint was ever filed against them, they were present at the cremation, have clean antecedents, and that the death was a suicide arising from an affair. The Additional Public Prosecutor did not dispute these submissions. Considering the lack of a specific complaint, the petitioners’ clean record, and the circumstances of the cremation, the court granted anticipatory bail with standard conditions under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
- Whether the petitioners can be implicated in offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 80, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 238, 3(5), 80, 85
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- death investigation
- clean antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 Sanhita
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89636 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2025 Thana- ANTI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Chandan Kumar S/o Suresh Kumar @ Suresh Yadav R/o Village - Tineri, P.S
- Anti, District - Gaya
2. Roopa Kumari @ Rupa Kumari D/o Suresh Kumar @ Suresh Yadav R/o
Village - Tineri, P.S - Anti, District - Gaya
3. Prity Kumari D/o Suresh Kumar @ Suresh Yadav R/o Village - Tineri, P.S -
Anti, District - Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 23-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Anti P.S. Case No.69 of 2025, F.I.R dated
01.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 85, 80, 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, based on a written
complaint, stating that the informant’s sister was married to
Vikash Kumar on 16.07.2024. Soon after the marriage, she was
allegedly subjected to assault and harassment by her husband
and in-laws for dowry. The informant claims that whenever he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89636 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
2/4
visited her, she informed him about the physical abuse. He was
also allegedly assaulted when he refused to fulfill the dowry
demands. On 01.06.2025 at about 2:30 A.M., the informant
received news of his sister’s death. Upon reaching her
matrimonial home, he found no one present and noticed a fire
burning on the village outskirts. There, he saw a cremation
taking place without any family members present. Later, women
at another house informed him that his sister had died and had
already been cremated without informing her parental family.
The informant alleges that the cremation was conducted secretly
behind their back.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioner Nos.1, 2 and 3 are brother-in-law and sister-in-laws
respectively and the petitioner No.1 is married and living
separately while both the sister-in-laws are un-married. It has
next been submitted that no single complaint of harassing was
ever been made against these petitioners and after the death of
the deceased, due information was given to the family members
of the deceased and the informant along with his family
members were all along present during the cremation process.
The petitioners have clean antecedent. It has further been
submitted that during the course of investigation, it has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89636 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
3/4
transpired that the deceased was having an affair and owing to
some differences, suicide is said to have been committed and the
petitioner’s complicity with the death cannot be attributed to the
petitioners.
5. Learned APP for the State, though opposes the
prayer for anticipatory bail application, is not in a position to
controvert the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that no single complaint of harassing was ever been made
against these petitioners and the informant along with his family
members were all along present during the cremation process
and the petitioners have clean antecedent. Accordingly, this
Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the
petitioners.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period
of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released
on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IX, Gaya, in
connection with Anti P.S. Case No.69 of 2025, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89636 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
4/4
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…