SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 3654

PATNA HIGH COURT
Prabhat Kumar Singh, J
Gena Khatoon – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91804 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Md Musowir
For the Respondents: Mr. Shaheen Begum

Anticipatory bail granted based on insufficient direct involvement in allegations and the general nature of accusations.

Headnote:Statute Analysis: The judgment involves offenses under Sections 190, 191(2), 115(2), 85, 324(4), 352, and 351(2) of BNS and 3/4 of the D.P. Act. Facts of the Case: The petitioners, mother-in-law and devar of the informant's daughter, face accusations of harassment and setting fire to the informant's house over dowry demands.

Findings of Court:
The court granted anticipatory bail, noting the allegations against the petitioners were general and that they maintained clean antecedents.

Issues: The court framed the question of whether the petitioners should be granted anticipatory bail despite serious allegations.

Ratio Decidendi: The reasoning included the lack of direct involvement in the family affairs and the general nature of accusations.

Result: The anticipatory bail was granted conditionally.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

2 20-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State .

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 190 , 191 ( 2 ), 115 ( 2 ), 85 , 324 ( 4 ), 352 and 351 ( 2 ) of BNS and 3/ 4 of the D. P Act.

3 . Prosecution case , in brief, is that daughter of complainant solemnized marriage with co-accused Abdul Jabbar 3 years ago. Thereafter, it is alleged that informant was subjected to torture and harassment by the accused persons due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry . It is further alleged that on 28.04.2025 , all the accused persons set fire to the house of informant at night.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. Petitioner no. 1 is mother-in -law petitioner no. 2 is devar of the daughter of informant and they are simply victims of over-implications. Allegation against petitioners is general and omnibus. Petitioners are separate in mess and property and they are not concerned with family affairs of the daughter of informant and co-accused Abdul Jabbar. Moreover, thrust of accusation is against husband of the daughter of informant. Rest of the allegations are ornamental in nature to make the case grave . Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5 . Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application .

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of SDJM Katihar, District- Katihar in connection with Barsoi P. S. Case No. 110 of 2025 , subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top