Kaushalya Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45233 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -312 Year- 2014 Thana -KARAHGAR District- SASARAM (ROHTAS) ====================================================== Kaushalya Devi, wife of Bijay Pandey, resident of Village- Bhaluari, P.S. Kargahar, District- Rohtas.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sada Nand Ray For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arvind Kr.Pandey(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 07-04-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 304 (B) and 201/34 of the I.P.C Allegedly, Gopal Pandey, the husband of Geeta Devi and the daughter of the informant, was having illicit relationship with the petitioner and when Geeta Devi used to protest she was being assaulted by her husband and ultimately she was killed by her husband and the petitioner and other in-laws were also involved.

Submission is of false implication and that against the petitioner vague allegation has been leveled, the petitioner is having cordial relation with her husband, she has got no concern with Gopal Pandey who is the Devar of the petitioner, the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45233 of 2015 (3) dt.07-04-2016 2/2 petitioner without any fault is suffering in custody since 27.07.2015 and as such she deserves sympathetic consideration, to which the learned A.P.P. fairly submits that the petitioner is the elder Gotni of the deceased.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Smt. Richa Bhargav, J.M. 1st Class, Rohtas (Sasaram) in Kargahar P.S. Case No. 312 of 2014, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T