Sheela Devi @ Shila Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.37131 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -481 Year- 2015 Thana -JAHANABAD District- JEHANABAD ======================================================
1. SHEELA DEVI @ SHILA DEVI, wife of Ashok Singh
2. Lovely Devi@ Loverly Devi, Wife of Neeraj Singh Both residents of Village- Sheonan, P.S. Karona, (O.P) Jehanabad, District Jehanabad.
.... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sumeet Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-11-2016 Heard Sri Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel, who was assisted by Sri Sumeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Addl. Public Prosecutor. Two petitioners, who are mother-in-law and wife of brother of the husband of the informant, have approached this Court with a prayer to grant bail in the event of their arrest or surrender in Jehanabad P.S. Case No.481/2015 registered for the offence under Sections 342, 326, 307 and 498(A) of the Indian Penal Code.
It is a fact that initially F.I.R. was lodged on 01.11.2015 on the basis of fardbeyan of the victim, namely, Priti Devi. During pendency of investigation, the victim died and,
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37131 of 2016 (6) dt.16-11-2016 2/2 subsequently Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added. The informant died on 03.11.2015. In the F.I.R. itself, the victim had made specific allegation against all the accused persons including both the petitioners. It was alleged that both petitioners had poured Kerosene Oil on the person of the informant and, thereafter, she was set on fire by another accused person. The fardbeyan, in normal course, after the death of the informant, becomes dying declaration and in such cases, if there is specific accusation against the accused persons, there is no point for entertaining anticipatory bail petition.
Accordingly, the petition for grant of anticipatory bail in respect of both the petitioners is dismissed. (Rakesh Kumar, J) NKS/- U T