Partly allowed

Kameswar Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Jul 2025CR. MISC./41719/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application in a dowry torture FIR. The court rejected bail for three male petitioners after reviewing video footage of the assault, but granted anticipatory bail to two women petitioners with no criminal antecedent, imposing conditions including regular attendance before the Trial Court.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to Kanti Devi and Sandhaya Devi on furnishing bonds of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties; rejected for Kameswar, Dablu and Munna Paswan.

Kameswar Paswan Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41719 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-17 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Kameswar Paswan Son of Late Nagina Paswan R/o Vill- Soni Tola P.SKachhwan, Distt.- Rohtas

¶5

Kanti Devi Wife of Kameswar Paswan R/o Vill- Soni Tola P.S- Kachhwan, Distt.- Rohtas

¶6

Dablu Paswan Son of Kameswar Paswan R/o Vill- Soni Tola P.SKachhwan, Distt.- Rohtas

¶7

Munna Paswan Son of Kameswar Paswan R/o Vill- Soni Tola P.SKachhwan, Distt.- Rohtas

¶8

Sandhaya Devi Wife of Munna Paswan R/o Vill- Soni Tola P.S- Kachhwan, Distt.- Rohtas

¶9

... ... Petitioner/s

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Bihar

¶12

Priti Kumari D/O Jagdish Paswan R/o Vill- Kenarkala, P.S- Chenari, Distt.Rohtas

¶13

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶14

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

¶15

2 09-07-2025 Heard the parties.

¶16

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dehari Mahila P.S. Case No. 17 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 323, 498(A) and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act lodged on 26.05.2023, by the informant, Priti Kumari.

¶17

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that her marriage was solemnised in the petitioners’ family, but

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41719 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/4

¶19

was always tortured for dowry and the allegation is that when the informant failed to make the payment, on 20.04.2023 they were brutally assaulted. This led to the F.I.R.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that no such assault took place, the lady was not ready to continue with her marital status and an exaggerated F.I.R. has been lodged.

¶21

Learned APP Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh has taken this Court to learned Sessions Judge order to show that a video footage was made available by the informant in course of hearing and learned Sessions Judge witnessed the said footage showing assault on the family members of the informant by half a dozen people. In that background, so far as the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner no. 1, Kameshwar Paswan, petitioner no. 3, Dablu Paswan and the petitioner no. 4, Munna Paswan are concerned, the same are rejected.

¶22

So far as petitioner no. 2, Kanti Devi and petitioner no. 5, Sandhaya Devi are concerned, though allegation against them are there, considering the fact that they are ladies having no criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶23

Let the petitioner no. 2, Kanti Devi and petitioner no. 5, Sandhaya Devi be released on bail in the event of arrest

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41719 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 3/4

¶25

or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bihramganj at Rohtas, in connection with Dehari Mahila P.S. Case No. 17 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., as also with the following conditions:-

¶26

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner no. 2, Kanti Devi and petitioner no. 5, Sandhaya Devi who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶27

(ii) the petitioner no. 2, Kanti Devi and petitioner no. 5, Sandhaya Devi 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 their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

¶28

(iii) the petitioner no. 2, Kanti Devi and petitioner no. 5, Sandhaya Devi 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;

¶29

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41719 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 4/4

¶30

(iv) the petitioner no. 2, Kanti Devi and petitioner no.

¶31

5, Sandhaya Devi shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.

¶32

(Rajiv Roy, J)

¶33

Ankit Kumar/-

Kameswar Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kameswar Paswan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deomanti Devi Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Md. Sayeed Ismail Jattery and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Abhay Kumar Singh and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Gautam Arya Vs The State of Bihar

Jawahar Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Bhola @ Ankit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar