Rinku Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 18956 of 2020 ===================================================== Rinku Devi, Wife of Vinay Shankar Jha, R/o- Mo- Saraswati Nagar Road No. 1, P.S. Ahiyapur, District- Muzaffarpur.
.. ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar... ... Opposite Party/s ===================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv.
For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh (APP) ===================================================== The proceedings of the Court are being conducted through Video Conferencing and the Advocates joined the proceedings through Video Conferencing from their residence.
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 981 of 2015, Tr. No. 582 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under sections 307, 498A/34, 304B of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 D.P. Act. Earlier the bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 05.03.2019 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3310 of 2019.
Informant is the victim herself who in her fardbeyan dated 25.10.2015 has stated that she was married to accused Vinay Shankar Jha in the year, 2009 and from said wedlock two sons and one daughter were born, her in-laws always tortured her due to non-fulfilment of demand of dowry. Altercation took place between her and her mother-in-law and sister-in-law and it
is further alleged that her sister-in-law Rinku Devi (petitioner) poured k. oil on her body in presence of her mother-in-law and her husband and set her on fire and she started raising alarm and caught feet of her father-in-law and became unconscious and when she regained consciousness she found herself in hospital.
It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to animosity and strained relations with informant. The allegation of demand of dowry after having three children is not believable and even otherwise she could not have derived any benefit from such demand. She is separate in mess and residence and had no concern with the affairs of family of informant. She suffered burn injury at the time of cooking and had there been any intention to kill her she would not have been admitted in hospital.
She has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 30.06.2018. Charges have already been framed on 16.03.2019 and even after issuance of summons none of the witnesses have appeared before the court to depose.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties of the like amount in connection with Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 981 of
2015, S.Tr. No. 582 of 2016 to the satisfaction of learned court below where the case is pending, subject to the following conditions:-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and her absence on two consecutive dates without proper and valid reason, the trial court shall have liberty to cancel her bail bonds.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner. ( S. Kumar, J) Rajiv/- U T