Rani Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14959 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-218 Year-2024 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya ====================================================== Rani Kumari D/o Late Rajdev Paswan, W/o Sonu @ Zakir Ali R/o MohallaBairagi, PS -Kotwali, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Gajendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Braj Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-04-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The application is for grant of bail to the petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 34, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution alleges that on 28.04.2024, the maid (servant) of the father of the informant informed him that his father's quarter is locked from outside. On the said information, the informant rushed to the quarter and broke its door. He saw that his father was done to death and his dead body was concealed in a septic tank. The body was brought out from the septic tank in presence of the police.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner taking this Court through the FIR contended that the same has been
2/4 instituted against unknown miscreants, however, during the course of investigation, the petitioner, who was allegedly working as a maid in the house of the deceased, was apprehended and on her own self inculpatory statement she has been made accused along with two other persons, namely, Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Ram and Sonu @ Zakir Ali. Based upon her statement, both the two persons were also apprehended; moreover, it is the specific contention of the petitioner that the confession of the petitioner before the police would obviously hit by Sections 25 and 26 of the Indian Evidence Act and there is no other material except the confessional statement. Taking note of the aforesaid fact both Sonu @ Zakir Ali and Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Ram have been accorded the privilege of regular bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No.
74653 of 2024 vide order dated 18.12.2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 60013 of 2024 vide order dated 26.10.2024 respectively. It is lastly contended that be that as it may, the petitioner is a lady and now she has been incarcerated since 02.05.2024. The investigation of the crime is complete and the charge sheet has been submitted.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that
3/4 there are ample materials collected during the course of investigation which suggests the involvement of the petitioner.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the entire case is based on suspicion and circumstantial evidence, coupled with the fact that the case against the petitioner is based on self inculpatory statement and the petitioner is a lady, who is incarcerated for about a year having fair antecedent, let the petitioner, abovenamed, 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 learned ACJM 1st, Gaya in connection with Civil Line P.S. Case No. 218 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:- (i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the trial.
(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.
(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial. (iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates
4/4 without any cogent reason, her bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.
(v) The court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.
(Harish Kumar, J) Anjani/- U T