Santosh Ram Vs The State of Bihar

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi, APP ======================================================

¶13

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

¶14

3 08-05-2025

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as

¶16

learned APP for the State.

¶17

The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 80, 238, 3(5) of BNS in connection with Tariyani P.S. Case No.135 of 2024.

¶18

The prosecution case, in brief is that marriage of sister of informant was solemnized with Arun Kumar on 28.04.2024. At the time of marriage several gifts of the value of about Rs.1,00,000/- was given, however, despite of that they started making demand of Rs.2,00,000/- in dowry. IOn 01.07.2024 the informant received a call of his aunt (Mami) that the sister of informant has been murdered by her in-laws and

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2626 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 2/3

¶20

they have removed the dead body. Upon receiving of the said information the informant along with some other persons went to the matrimonial home of his sister and upon reaching there he found the door of their house was broken. They did not find any body in the home and upon making inquiry it transpired to them that Arun Kumar, Santosh Ram, Mukesh Ram, Anita Devi, Sukujan Ram and Harendra Ram together in collusion with each other committed murder of the sister of informant and concealed the dead body with an intention to disappear the evidence of crime. Accordingly, the FIR.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have clean antecedent and have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is next submitted that petitioner no.1 and 2 are cousin of the husband of deceased and petitioner no.3 also the wife of cousin of the husband of informant.

¶22

The learned APP opposes the anticipatory bail application, but fairly submits that Santosh Ram and Mukesh Ram reside outside Bihar and there nothing specific has come in the case diary against these the petitioners.

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2626 of 2025(3) dt.08-05-2025 3/3

¶24

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners all the three petitioners have clean antecedent. There is no specific allegation against the three petitioners and in fact the learned APP appearing points out after reading the case diary, Santosh Ram and Mukesh Ram reside outside Bihar and there nothing specific has come in the case diary against these the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000 /- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheohar in connection with Tariyani P.S. Case No.135 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

¶25

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

¶26

Prakash Narayan U T

Santosh Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Lalita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Roushan Kumar @ Raushan Vs The State of Bihar

Harihar Gond @ Harihar Sah Gond Vs The State of Bihar

Dhananjay Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Smt. Kamla Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.