Sudhir Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30281 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2022 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sudhir Mandal, S/o Harendra Mandal, R/o Village-Tilak Tajpur, P.SRunnisaidpur, Dist - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

Malti Devi, W/o Lalan Mandal, R/o Village -Gangwara, P.S- Runnisaidpur, Dist - Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Hans Lal Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bishweshwar Ram, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The accused/petitioner is named in the FIR and apprehending his arrest in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No.47 of 2022 (S. Tr. No.174 of 2023) registered under Sections 304-B read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per FIR, the petitioner along with co-accused persons/family members caused death of daughter of informant due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30281 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026 2/3 petitioner that the trial of in-laws members was separated with this petitioner where the informant (PW-3) in (S. Tr. No.174 of 2023) categorically deposed that her daughter having suicidal tendency since her childhood and, therefore, out of said tendency, she committed suicide, having no fault of in-laws' family members including this petitioner.

5. It is submitted that in view of such deposition and as on all material aspects, the investigation of this case is completed, therefore, sending this petitioner behind the bar would not serve any purpose of justice. The petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

6. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the deposition of informant and other prosecution witnesses in separate trial cannot be read while deciding the present prayer of anticipatory bail filed by the husband. It is submitted that as per FIR, the informant categorically stated that it was her deceased daughter, who said her during treatment that this petitioner, who is the husband and also all in-laws family members assaulted her badly and strangulated her, due to which, she became

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30281 of 2026(4) dt.24-07-2026 3/3 unconscious and, thereafter, she was brought to hospital for treatment, where she died finally.

7. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by taking note of fact, as the allegation of physical assault and strangulation appears available against this petitioner, who is the husband in terms of FIR, accordingly, the prayer of anticipatory bail of petitioner stands rejected. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.) Sanjeet/- U T