Daya Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6009 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-418 Year-2020 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

Daya Devi Wife Of Late Chalitar Ram R/O-Naragi Jivnath, P.S.-SARAIYA, (JAITPUR O.P.), Distt.-MUZAFFARPUR 2.

Kavita Devi @ Kabita Devi Wife Of Pankaj Ram R/O-Miya Pakri, P.S.- KANTI, Distt.-MUZAFFARPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-04-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are women and have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, who is mother of the deceased. It is next submitted that her daughter was married to Manoj Ram about 12 years back and the family members of Manoj Ram including the petitioners were demanding motorcycle and cash. It is further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6009 of 2024(4) dt.26-04-2024 2/3 alleged that the maternal grand son informed that mother has been killed by Dadi, Fua and Fufa. It is next alleged that Manoj Ram married one Kajal Devi about two years back and left her daughter with her children. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the husband of the deceased has not been accused in the instant case. It is further submitted that since Manoj Ram performed his second marriage and left the deceased and child in lurch as such the deceased was depressed, hence committed suicide. It is also submitted that in these 12 years no case ever came to be instituted alleging that petitioners in any manner were torturing the deceased. It is next submitted that the petitioners are in custody since 04.08.2022. It is further submitted that charges have been framed and trial has commenced and the petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial.

4. The learned APP opposes the prayer for regular bail application of the petitioner.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6009 of 2024(4) dt.26-04-2024 3/3 the case is pending/successor court in connection with S.Tr. No.202/2021/S. Tr. No.152/2023, arising out of Saraiya P.S. Case No.418/2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

6. However, if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioners after being released on bail is trying to delay the trial in any manner, in that event, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T