Gayatri Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41333 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-357 Year-2020 Thana- SABAUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== GAYATRI DEVI Wife of Prabhu Yadav, Resident of Village - Daspur, P.S.- Sajour (Shahkund), District - Bhagalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Dr. Manoj Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-02-2022 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through video conferencing.

The learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to remove all the defects pointed out by the office within one month.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Sabour P.S. Case No. 357 of 2020 registered for offence punishable under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

As per prosecution case, the husband of the present petitioner Prabhu Yadav has taken Rs. 5,00,000/- cash on credit from the deceased Sunny Kumar. On 15.12.2020, the husband

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41333 of 2021(2) dt.09-02-2022 2/2 of the petitioner, namely, Prabhu Yadav and co-accused Yogesh Yadav took the deceased by their motor cycle. The informant Sanjana Kumari has further mentioned in the FIR that coaccused Prabhu Yadav, Yogesh Yadav and the present petitioner in a deep conspiracy committed murder of the deceased. The informant has also mentioned in the FIR that the present petitioner also threatened the deceased prior to the occurrence. During the course of investigation, co-accused Jyotish Yadav was arrested and he has furnished his self inculpatory confessional statement and stated that he committed murder of deceased Sunny Kumar by fired shot by his pistol. He has also stated that the petitioner was one of the conspirators of the alleged crime with whom the deceased had also illicit relation. Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances, in my view, it is not a fit case for anticipatory bail and accordingly the prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey , J) Mahesh/- U T