Patna High Court
Hemlata VermaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Summary
The petitioners, Hemlata Verma and Mithlesh Kumar, parents of the husband of informant Priya Kumari, applied for anticipatory bail in a case alleging dowry harassment, attempted murder and other offences under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Dowry Prohibition Act. The informant claimed that her husband, the petitioners' son, was deserted and that the petitioners, on her allegation, attempted to kill her due to dowry demands. The petitioners contended that the allegations were false, arising from a marital dispute exacerbated by the COVID‑19 lockdown, and that there were no specific charges against them. The husband had already been granted anticipatory bail by a co‑ordinate bench of the same court. Considering the general nature of the allegations and the prior bail to the husband, the court inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, imposing bail bonds and sureties under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The application for anticipatory bail was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners despite the general allegations under Sections 351(2), 351(3), 85, 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act
- Whether the prior grant of anticipatory bail to the husband influences the decision on the petitioners' bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 85
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- dowry harassment
- criminal law
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- family dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90650 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2025 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Hemlata Verma W/o Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithilesh Kumar @ Mithilesh
Prasad @ Mithlesh Prasad R/o vill - Kandha, P.S.- Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya
2. Mithlesh Kumar @ Mithilesh Kumar @ Mithilesh Prasad @ Mithlesh
Prasad S/o Narayan Mahto @ Narayan Mahato R/o vill - Kandha, P.S.-
Wazirganj, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Priya Kumari D/o Sri Duryodhan Mehta R/o Ratan Niwas, Koyribari, P.s.-
Civil Lines, Distt.- Gaya
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Aryan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Despite valid service of notice on Opposite Party No. 2,
no one appears on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 2.
3. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out
of Civil Lines Police Station Case No. 92 of 2025, dated
03.03.2025, disclosing offences punishable under
Sections 351(2)/351(3)/85/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition
Act.
4. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report,
is that the husband of the informant has deserted her for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90650 of 2025(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
the past four years and she is residing in the village. The
husband of the informant did not give her any money to
maintain herself. On 09.11.2021, the husband of the
informant came from Delhi and on the instigation of the
petitioners, he tried to kill her. It has further been alleged
that due to non-fulfillment of the demand of dowry, the
accused persons, including the petitioners torture her,
both mentally as well as physically.
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are the mother and father of the husband of the
informant. The marriage of the informant was solemnized
with the son of the petitioners in the year 2021 and they
were living together at Delhi, but due to COVID-19, the
informant was forced to return to the village, which was
not to the liking of the informant and for this reason
alone, the informant has falsely implicated the petitioners,
who are having non interference in the life of the
informant and her husband. There is no specific allegation
against the petitioners. He further submits that the
husband of the informant has already been granted
anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court,
vide order, dated 28.01.2026, passed in Criminal Misc.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90650 of 2025(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
No. 91011 of 2025.
6. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf
of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that
there is general and omnibus allegation against the
petitioners and the husband of the informant has been
granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this
Court, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of
anticipatory bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
8. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their
arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period
of four weeks from today, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each
with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-V, Gaya, in connection with Civil Lines Police
Station Case No. 92 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.)
Prabhakar Anand/-
U √ T √
Checking your session…