← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24193/2025bail granted

Puja Devi @ Puja Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-01Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24193 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-733 Year-2019 Thana- KATIHAR COMPLAINT CASE District- Katihar ====================================================== 1.

Puja Devi @ Puja Kumari Daughter of Vijendra Yadav village- Sigiyan ward no 12, Amari Dharhra, Ps- Murliganj Dist- Madhepura 2.

Vishakhi Devi@ Bishekha Devi Wife of Buchchi Yadav Resident of Village - Baniya Rangda Chowk, Bhawanipur Durga Mandir, Ps- Rangra, DistBhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Saraswati Devi Daughter of Shree Chandrika Yadav Resident of Village - Maweya Bishanpur, Ps- Kodha, Dist- Katihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a complaint case punishable for the offence under Sections 498(A), 494 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Allegation against petitioners and other co-accused persons is of commission of torture and cruelty to the complainant for dowry. It is further alleged that husband of complainant was having illicit relation with petitioner no. 1 (Puja Kumari).

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24193 of 2025(2) dt.01-05-2025 2/2

4. Petitioner no. 1 is so called wife of and petitioner no. 2 is mother-in-law of the complainant. Thrust of the accusation is against husband of the complainant. Petitioners are separate in mess and property and have got no concern with the family affairs of complainant and her husband. Petitioners are ladies and have got clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioners.

6. However, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katihar in connection with Complaint Case No. 733 of 2019, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T