Sumitra Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20363 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-330 Year-2024 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran ====================================================== Sumitra Devi Wife of Bhudeo Mukhiya @ Bhudeo Mukhiya Resident ofVillage- Bara Chaumukha, P.S.- Yogapatti, Distt.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP For the Informant :

Mrs. Preeti Kumari, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State, learned counsel for the informant and perused the case diary.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 330 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that, the petitioner along with other co-accused person poisoned husband of the informant due to which he died and later on the accused persons threatened the informant that they will kill her too.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20363 of 2025(3) dt.10-07-2025 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that there is no eye witness to the said occurrence. It is next submitted that no any independent witness have supported the statement of the informant. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a lady and cause of death of the deceased has not been ascertained as per the post-mortem report. The petitioner is in custody since 07.11.2024 and has got no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner 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 Court below/concerned Court in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 330 of 2024.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T