Jharkhand High Court
Satya Narayan Bansal vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 26 March, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 2004 of 2025
------
1. Satya Narayan Bansal, aged about 65 years, son of late
Bhagwan Das Agarwal
2. Koshalya Devi, aged about 63 years, wife of Sri Satya
Narayan Bansal
3. Shivani Bansal @ Shiwani, aged about 41 years, wife of Sri
Manish Bansal
4. Toral Bansal, aged about 33 years, wife of Sri Anish Bansal
All are resident of Village-Hindustan Auto Agency Chas,
P.O.+P.S.-Chas, Dist.-Bokaro
... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No.02 Dated- 26.03.2025
Heard the parties.
Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this
Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with
Chas P.S. Case No.389 of 2019 (G.R. No. 534 of 2023) registered for the
offences punishable under sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners in furtherance
of common intention with the co-accused persons have committed
the dowry death of Payal Bansal. It is further submitted that the
allegations against the petitioners are all false and police after
investigation of the case did not send up the petitioners for trial and
only sent up the husband of the deceased for trial but the learned
Magistrate differing from the final report has taken cognizance of the
offence punishable under Section 304B of Indian Penal Code against
the petitioners as well. It is next submitted that the co-accused-
husband of the deceased faced the trial and the informant has been
examined in that case as P.W.3 but he did not support the case of the
prosecution and he has categorically stated that the deceased was
treated by her in-laws properly and the co-accused-husband has been
acquitted vide judgment dated 11.05.2022 in Sessions Trial Case No.
141 of 2020 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-IV-cum-
Special Judge (Crime Against Women), Bokaro. It is then submitted
that the petitioners undertake to furnish sufficient security including
cash security and also undertake to cooperate with the trial of the
case and further undertake that they will not annoy or disturb the
informant or any of the witnesses in any manner during the
pendency of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be
given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as
discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the
abovenamed petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on
depositing cash security of Rs. 10,000/- each and on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M.,
Bokaro, in connection with Chas P.S. Case No.389 of 2019 (G.R. No.
534 of 2023) with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate
with the trial of the case with further condition that they will not
annoy or disturb the informant or any of the witnesses in any manner
during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Sonu/Gunjan-
