Allowed¶23

Nirmala Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Apr 2025CR. MISC./86590/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna HC CRL.M./CR. MISC. No.86590 of 2024; Soni Shrivastava J; order dated 04-04-2025; regular bail granted to in-laws of deceased woman; arising out of Bodhgaya P.S. Case No.-59 Year-2024, Thana-BODHGAYA, District-Gaya; IPC Sections 498A, 302, 34; Dowry Prohibition Act Section 3/4; charge-sheet under Sections 498A, 306 r/w Section 34 IPC; cognizance under Sections 302/34 IPC despite final report; petitioners in custody since 19.05.2024; husband in custody since 04.02.2024; no presumption in law; bail bond Rs.10,000/- with two sureties; satisfaction of Judicial Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to both petitioners on each furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

Nirmala Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Dowry and Cruelty | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the two petitioners should be granted regular bail in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case no.59 of 2024.

¶15

Court's answer

Both petitioners directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case no.59 of 2024, each furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

¶23

Ratio / Principle

In deciding the bail application, the court took into account that this was not a case of any presumption in law, and noted the statement in paragraph no. 9 of the petition regarding the husband of the deceased.

¶21

Key takeaways

Bail was further considered on the basis that the husband of the deceased, who is primarily responsible for the welfare of his wife, was already in custody since 04.02.2024, and the petitioners had remained in custody since 19.05.2024.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.86590 of 2024, Soni Shrivastava, J., 04-04-2025 (oral order): Regular bail granted to Nirmala Devi and Arjun Lal @ Arjun Lal Srivastava, arraigned in Bodhgaya P.S. Case no.59 of 2024 (District Gaya) registered under Sections 498A, 302 and 34 IPC and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act, concerning the death by hanging of the daughter-in-law amid alleged dowry demands. As submitted by counsel, the charge-sheet stood under Sections 498A, 306 read with Section 34 IPC, but the court below, differing with the final report, took cognizance under Sections 302 and 34 IPC; the petitioners, identified in argument as the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased facing general and omnibus allegations, were in custody since 19.05.2024. Granting bail, the court noted it was not a case of any presumption in law and considered that the husband, primarily responsible for his wife's welfare (per paragraph 9 of the petition), was in custody since 04.02.2024. Condition: bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Judicial Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86590 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-59 Year-2024 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya

¶3

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

¶4

Nirmala Devi wife of Arjun Lal @ Arjun Lal Srivastava village- Bakaror, Ps- Bodhgaya, Dist- Gaya

¶5

Arjun Lal @ Arjun Lal Srivastava Son of Late Sita Ram lal village- Bakaror, Ps- Bodhgaya, Dist- Gaya

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mrigendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nityanand, APP

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 04-04-2025

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioners have preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case no.59 of 2024 registered under Sections 498A, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the informant states that she married her daughter with one Tuntun Kumar before 8 years of the occurrence. After some days of marriage, all accused persons including the petitioners herein started to assault the informant’s daughter mentally and physically on

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86590 of 2024(3) dt.04-04-2025 2/3

¶18

account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. He further states that he got information that his daughter had committed suicide after hanging herself.

¶19

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners are the mother-in-law and the father-in-law of the deceased. There is general and omnibus allegation levelled against them in the F.I.R with regard to demand of dowry. The petitioners are also staying separate in mess from their son and the deceased and have no role in the matrimonial affairs of the deceased and her husband. Learned counsel further submits that after investigation, charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 498A, 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, but however learned Court below differing with the Final Report, took cognizance against them under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners are languishing in custody since 19.05.2024 and undertake to co-operate in investigation/trial.

¶20

The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

¶21

Considering the fact that it is not a case of any presumption in law and also considering the statement made in paragraph no. 9 to the petition that the husband of the deceased

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86590 of 2024(3) dt.04-04-2025 3/3

¶23

who is primarily responsible for the welfare of his wife, is already in custody since 04.02.2024 and the petitioners having remained in custody since 19.05.2024, both the petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case no.59 of 2024 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

¶24

(Soni Shrivastava, J)

¶25

Harsh/- U T

Nirmala Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nirmala Devi 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

Manoj Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Parbhawati Devi @ Prabhawati Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Gabbar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Arti Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Pramod Mandal @ Pramod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramuna Devi Vs The State of Bihar