Ranju Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34415 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-692 Year-2023 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Ranju Devi Wife of Amarjeet Chaudhary @ Amarjit Kumar Chaudhari Resident of village - Ramray Singhara, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali 2.
Khusboo Kumari Wife of Indrajeet Chaudhary Resident of village - Ramray Singhara, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali 3.
Mushkan Kumari @ Mushkan Devi Wife of Sanjeet Chaudhary @ Sanjeet Kumar Resident of village - Ramray Singhara, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bela Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-08-2024
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are person with clean antecedent and are women and the informant alleges that his sister was married to Ranjit Chaudhary in the Year 2021 and after marriage, a child was born and the accused persons were demanding dowry of Rs. 2 lacs and for non-fulfilment of the demand, his sister was killed and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34415 of 2024(4) dt.30-08-2024 2/3 her body was thrown in an orchard from where it was recovered after search.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case being sister-in-law (Gotni) of the deceased. It is next submitted that petitioners are separate in mess and property from Ranjit and they do not have any concern with the day-to-day affair of Ranjit and his family. It is also submitted that whenever any dispute of the nature as alleged in the occurrence, the entire family members are implicated in a mechanical manner with general and omnibus allegation. It is also submitted that informant is not an eye-witness to the occurrence and the entire allegation hinges around suspicion. It is next submitted that Ranjit is in custody since 01.05.2024 and the husbands of the petitioners had moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No. 35872 of 2024 and the same was allowed by an order dated 23.07.2024.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34415 of 2024(4) dt.30-08-2024 3/3 within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Rakesh Ranjan, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 692 of 2023 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J.) Sudhanshu/- U T