Fulo Devi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10431 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -297 Year- 2017 Thana -TRIVENIGANJ District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Fulo Devi, W/o Rameshwar Yadav,

2. Mithalesh Yadav @ Mithilesh Yadav

3. Akhilesh Yadav Both Sons Rameshwar Yadav, All are R/o Village- Latona North , P.S.- Triveniganj, District- Supaul.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mustaque Alam, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 297 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that petitioners are mother-inlaw and Dewar of the deceased. There is no allegation of any specific overt act against the petitioners. The petitioners have no concern with the affairs of the deceased and her husband. From the written report it appears that there is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners that they have done to death the daughter of the informant by giving poison.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10431 of 2018 (2) dt.27-02-2018 2/2 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 297 of 2017, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st, Supaul, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

with further conditions (1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel their bail bond and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

(Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T