Sunita Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17520 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -14 Year- 2017 Thana -BELA District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. Sunita Devi, Wife of Shital Mahto.

2. Shital Mahto, Son of Late Faguni Mahto.

Both R/o village - Chandi Rajwara Tole Gopalpur, P.S. Bela, District - Sitamarhi .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER -------------- 04-07-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Bela P.S. Case No.14 of 2017 registered under Sections 304(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is of killing the deceased, the daughter of the informant, by her husband and other in-laws, within three years of her marriage, for non fulfillment of the dowry demand. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are parents-in-laws of the deceased, the daughter of the informant. In fact, the deceased died of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17520 of 2017 (4) dt.04-07-2017 2/3 diarrhoea and the information regarding the death of the deceased was given to the informant but with an ulterior motive, the informant has lodged this false case. After realizing the mistake, the informant has also filed an application before the court of the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, at the time of disposal of the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners. Further submission is that while viscera of the dead body of the deceased, the daughter of the informant, was kept preserved but in the postmortem examination of the dead body of the deceased, the daughter of the informant, no external injury was found on her person. The husband of the deceased, the daughter of the informant, is already in custody.

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposed the prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail but very fairly submits that in the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased, the daughter of the informant, no external injury was found on her person.

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender by them within six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17520 of 2017 (4) dt.04-07-2017 3/3 satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection with Bela P.S. Case No.14 of 2017, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T