Shanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19425 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -30 Year- 2014 Thana -JIRADEI District- SIWAN ====================================================== Shanti Devi, Wife of Jyotish Prasad, Resident of Village - Surwal, Police Station - Ziradei, District - Siwan.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr.Mrigank Mauli, Advocate Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr. G.S.Gupta(APP) For the Informant : Mr. Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 24-09-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the informant as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Ziradei P.S. Case No.30 of 2014 for allegedly having committed the offence under Sections 342, 326, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code has been added.

Earlier, case diary in the present case had been called for, which has since been received.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner being lady has been roped in the present case only

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19425 of 2015 (4) dt.24-09-2015 2/3 because there was some love affairs existing between deceased Imran and the daughter of the present petitioner, namely, Sapana Kumari. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no eye-witness to the occurrence and also that informant Jarina Khatoon has narrated the story stating that her son had told her that it was this petitioner who had, in fact, taken the deceased behind the house and sprinkled kerosene oil and burnt him.

Pointing out to paragraph 2 of the case diary, learned counsel for the State submits that the boy in question was not in a position to make any statement soon after or in the hospital where he was taken for treatment. So far as Jyotish Prasad, the husband of the present petitioner is concerned, he has been extended the privilege of regular bail by a Bench of this Court, vide order dated 8.4.2015, passed in Cr.Misc. No.49823 of 2014, taking into consideration the fact that the charge sheet under Section 306 of the I.P.C. has been submitted, vide order dated 12.02.2015, and cognizance has also accordingly been taken.

Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances and also that the petitioner is a lady, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or surrender

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19425 of 2015 (4) dt.24-09-2015 3/3 before the court below within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, 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 the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, in connection with Ziradei P.S. Case No.30 of 2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U T