Babita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10008 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-332 Year-2018 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia ====================================================== BABITA DEVI aged about 45 years (Female) Wife of Bhikhari Sah Resident of Village - Nirpur Baran, P. S. Dhamdaha, District - Purnea. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Uday Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 19-02-2019 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 332 of 2018, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 149, 341, 342, 323 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation is regarding the husband of the informant being assaulted by the accused persons and as far as the co-accused, namely, Md. Akram is concerned, he is stated to have closed the nose and mouth of the husband of the informant and then, thrashed him while the co-accused, namely, Md. Anamul had sat on the chest of the husband of the informant and pressed his neck resulting in injuries to the husband of the informant, which further caused his death subsequently. As far as the petitioner is concerned, she is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10008 of 2019(2) dt.19-02-2019 2/2 stated to have pressed the Hydrocele of the husband of the informant.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady, having a clean antecedent and the cause of death as per the postmortem report, which is throttling and Trachea broken at the level of Thyroid cartilage, is not attributable to the petitioner herein as is clear from the allegations levelled in the F.I.R., hence, the petitioner should be granted the privilege of bail, especially since the main accused are Md. Akram and Md. Anamul and others. The petitioner is stated to be languishing in custody since 17.11.2018.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and proper to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail.

Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 learned C.J.M., Purnea in connection with Dhamdaha P.S. Case No. 332 of 2018.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) ajay gupta/- U T