Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8609 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2018 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

MANJU DEVI Wife of Shiaram Yadav @ Sri Ram Yadav Resident of Village - Selgadh, P.S.- Rani Talab, District - Patna. 2.

Shiaram Yadav @ Sri Ram Yadav Son of Ramdhyan Yadav Resident of Village - Selgadh, P.S.- Rani Talab, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashok Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad Mr. Ashok Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 24-06-2020 The present petition has been taken up for consideration through the mode of Video conferencing in view of the prevailing situation on account of COVID 19 Pandemic, requiring social distancing.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ashok Kumar, the learned APP appearing for the State. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner no. 2 has been arrested, hence, the present petition qua the petitioner no. 2 is not being pressed. Accordingly, the present petition qua the petitioner no. 2 stands dismissed as not pressed.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8609 of 2020(3) dt.24-06-2020 2/3 connection with Rani Talab P.S. Case No. 271 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is regarding the daughter of the informant having been set on fire by her in-laws including the husband by pouring kerosene oil upon her on account of non-fulfillment of the demand for dowry.

The learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that the father-in-law and husband of the deceased victim lady are already in custody, hence, no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution if the petitioner no. 1, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased victim lady, is granted the privilege of anticipatory bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is innocent, she has committed no offence and she has been falsely implicated in the present case.

Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the fact that the father-in-law and the husband of the deceased victim lady are in custody, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioner no. 1 to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8609 of 2020(3) dt.24-06-2020 3/3 privilege of anticipatory bail.

Accordingly, the petitioner no. 1 is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Danapur, District-Patna in connection with Rani Talab P.S.Case No. 271 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U T