Rubi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25922 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-76 Year-2024 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Rubi Kumari Wife of Ratnesh Kumar Resident of Vill- Parmanandpur, P.S.- Vaishali and District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 76 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of IPC.

3. The informant Rakesh Kumar is husband of the deceased, and the petitioner Rubi Kumari is gotani of the deceased. According to the allegation, when the informant was at his place of work, he got information that his wife had been murdered. He rushed to his house and saw the petitioner along with her mother Kaushalya Devi, and her father Hira Lal Paswan running from his house and he saw the dead body of his wife.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. As a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25922 of 2025(4) dt.24-09-2025 2/2 matter of fact, the husband of the deceased had illicit relations with another lady, and due to annoyance, the deceased committed suicide. In the FIR, no reason has been assigned for commission of murder of the deceased by the petitioner and her family members. During investigation, it came to light that the family members of the petitioner were not present at the place of occurrence, and they have not been sent up by the investigating authorities. The ligature mark around the neck of the deceased shows that she had committed suicide.

5. The witness, Ravindra Paswan, in paragraph no. 9 of the case diary, has stated that some quarrels used to take place between the petitioner and the deceased, due to which the deceased committed suicide. This witness has also stated that the reason for the quarrel was that the petitioner is a lady of questionable chastity, to which the deceased used to object, and it is the reason that she was done to death. The investigation is still pending, and the emergence of further evidence cannot be ruled out.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) kundan/- U T