Dropadi Devi And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.53148 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -134 Year- 2017 Thana -BAKHTIARPUR District- SAHARSA ======================================================
1. Dropadi Devi, Wife of Late Umesh Sharma,
2. Nand Kishor Sharma, Son of Latho Sharma,
3. Sonu Kumar alias Sonu Sharma, Son of Late Umesh Sharma. All Residents of Village- Bariyarpur, Police Station- Baktiarpur, DistrictSaharsa. .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umanath Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 19-12-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Bakhtiarpur P.S. Case No.134 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 447, 341, 354, 435, 307, 34 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The fardbeyan has been lodged by the informant in I.C.U. Unit alleging therein that she along with her sister were at her house in absence of her mother. Her younger sister went to bring floor. In the meantime, Guddu Sharma and Sonu Sharma entered in her room with bad intention and misbehaved with the informant upon which she objected and brought chilly powder. In the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53148 of 2017 (4) dt.19-12-2017 2/3 meantime, Dropadi Devi came and caught her both hands and thereafter, Dinesh Sharma came by and asked to kill her. Dropadi Devi brought kerosene oil and poured on her and Nand Kishore Sharma brought match box and set fire on her body as a result of which she sustained burn injuries. She raised hulla upon which her younger sister and other neighbours arrived and she was brought near the tube well where cold water was put on her body and thereafter, she was hospitalized where her treatment is going on. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is no eye witness of the case. The father of the informant is in custody in a case lodged by husband of petitioner no.1 and, therefore, they have been falsely implicated in the case. The informant subsequently died.
From the written report, it appears that there is specific allegation against all the accused persons. The informant subsequently died on account of burn injuries. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners stands rejected.
They may surrender and make prayer for regular bail which shall be disposed of by the court below in accordance with
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53148 of 2017 (4) dt.19-12-2017 3/3 law without being prejudiced by this order.
(Sanjay Priya, J) N.H./- U T