Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4613 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-297 Year-2022 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== MEENA DEVI S/o Late Devendra Roy R/o- Tikatpur, P.S.- Bihta (Neura O.P.), District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akhileshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 31.03.2022, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 893 of 2022 arising out of Bihta (Neura O.P.) P.S. Case No. 297 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 30.03.2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Prosecution story is that the informant, Vinod Kumar alleging that ten days before his brother namely, Devendra Roy along with his wife went to sasural and were living there for ten days. Informant further alleged that on 30.03.2022 when he was standing at the door then he saw that in a red Maruti Car 1, wife of his brother Meena Devi, 2. brother-in-law Chanchal Roy, son of late Baljeet Prasad, 3. wife of Chanchal Roy, 4. brother-in-law (Sadhu) Pintu Roy, came and after throwing the dead body of his brother Devendra Roy at the door and started running. Informant further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4613 of 2023(3) dt.18-05-2023 2/2 alleged that when he started roaring then they started fleeing and with the help of villagers, they caught the wife of his brother Meena Devi and other persons succeeded to flee.

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 is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

Vide order dated 27.04.2023, report was called for with regard to stage of trial and reported dated 09.05.2023 of the learned trial Court reveals that charge has been framed against the accused person on 14.11.2022 and out of four charge-sheet witnesses, 2 witnesses have already been examined by the prosecution and the case is pending to the rest of the prosecution evidence. Considering the report of the learned trial Court, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, therefore, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected. However, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial expeditiously. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) sanjeev/- U T