The lack of specific allegations in the FIR against the accused allows for bail under the presumption of non-offence, considering clean antecedents.

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Informant : Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

2 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Sumit Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the Informant and Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

25.08.2025, in connection with Adapur P.S. Case No. 281 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 24.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80 , 61(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act .

3. Allegation against the petitioner is of committing torture and caused death to the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It appears from the F.I.R. that although the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. but there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act or demand of dowry attributed against the petitioer rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner and petitioner has been made accused merely on the ground that the petitioner is father- in-law of the deceased. From perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that the informnat is not eye witness of the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the deceased has committed suicide herself and the police after investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 25.08.2025.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State as well as learned counsel for the Informant, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and he has participated in the present crime in question.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act or demand of dowry in the F.I.R., let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul at Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Adapur P.S. Case No. 281 of 2025, subject to the following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)