Basanti Devi v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5345 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -194 Year- 2016 Thana -BARACHATTI District- GAYA ====================================================== Basanti Devi, wife of Late Surendra Prasad, resident of village-Sinduar, P.S. Mohanpur (Barachatti), Distt. Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Mukhdeo Mahto, son of late Dasrath Mahto

3. Asha Devi, wife of Dinesh Prasad

4. Kamli Devi wife of Ram Balak Mahto All are residents of village-Sinduar, P.S. Mohanpur, (Barachatti), DisttGaya. .... .... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Partyie : Mr. Ahmad Ali, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-02-2017 Opposite Parties no. 2, 3 and 4 have been granted anticipatory bail by learned Sessions Judge, Gaya, by order dated 4.11.2016 passed in A.B.P. no. 1910 in connection with Barachatti P. S. Case no. 194 of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of the Dine Act.

This application has been filed seeking cancellation of bail so granted. It is submitted that learned Sessions Judge, Gaya, while granting anticipatory bail failed to take into account the gravity of the offence and other circumstances. There is no allegation of misuse of privilege of bail. Exercise of discretion in

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5345 of 2017 (2) dt.06-02-2017 2/2 granting anticipatory bail to opposite parties no. 2, 3 and 4 cannot be said to be wrong.

In the facts and circumstance, I do not find any merit in this application, which is accordingly dismissed. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) sudip/- U T