Anticipatory bail granted due to general and omnibus nature of dowry allegations against the petitioners.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER

6 18-12-2025 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Complaint Case No. 1211 C of 2013, disclosing offences under Sections 3 23 , 494, 504, 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act .

3. As per the allegation made in the complaint, the marriage of the complainant was solemnized with the petitioner of Cr. Misc. No. 54851 of 2025. On 25.05.2019, it has been alleged that after six months of the marriage, the petitioners and other family members started demanding dowry by way of cash and jewellery. Ultimately, the complainant was ousted from her matrimonial home.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Petitioner of Cr. Misc. No. 28873 of 2025 is brother-in-law of the complainant and petitioner Anil Kumar alias Anil Kumar Mandal is the husband of the complainant. The allegation of demand of dowry against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature and the entire family members were made accused in the complaint, however, cognizance has been taken against the petitioners and Pramila Devi who happens to be the mother-in- law of the complainant. He next submits that cognizance under Section 498A of the I.P.C. and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act was initially taken against the petitioners on

20.11.2014 which was challenged in revision by husband of the complainant and the matter was remanded back to the Learned Magistrate, however, the Learned Magistrate, on 13.04.2017 took cognizance again under Section 498A of the I.P.C., however, the summons and/or any warrant were never served upon the petitioners and suddenly the petitioners came to know that process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued.

Despite service of notice, nobody appears for Opposite Party No. 2.

5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the dispute relates to husband and wife, allegation of demand of dowry is general and omnibus in nature against all the family members, accordingly, considering the nature of allegation and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail. 6. This application is, accordingly, allowed.

7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1211 C of 2013, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section