Prem Shila Devi @ Pramshila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15304 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-219 Year-2016 Thana- BARAULI District- Gopalganj ====================================================== 1.

PREM SHILA DEVI @ PRAMSHILA DEVI W/o Subhash Prasad Resident of Village- Fatehpur, P.s.- Jamo, District- Siwan. 2.

Rinku Kumari W/o Umashankar Prasad Resident of Village- Hasanpur Mathiya, P.S.- Sidhwaliya, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sumit Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Barauli P.S. Case No. 219 of 2016 registered under Sections 304B/34 of the I.P.C.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that earlier prayer of the petitioners for grant of bail was twice rejected by this Court vide orders dated 22.06.2017 and 24.04.2019 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9796 of 2017 and Cr. Misc. No. 14295 of 2019 respectively.

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioners by contending

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15304 of 2022(6) dt.06-07-2022 2/2 that on 30.03.2022 a report was called for from the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gopalganj, as to why the petitioners have not been arrested till date and what steps have been taken for arrest of these petitioners. From perusal of the report dated 05.04.2022 (Letter No. 54) received from the court below, it appears that Non-bailable Warrants have already been issued against both the petitioners, but they did not turn up. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the report of the court below, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

Accordingly, prayer of the petitioners is again rejected. shailendra/- (Arvind Srivastava, J) U T