Sajani Devi @ Soni Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34418 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-87 Year-2016 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Sajani Devi @ Soni Kumari Wife of Bittu Kumar village- Baikathpur, PsKhushrupur, Dist- patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prabhat Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Upendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 22-05-2025 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Khushrupur P.S. Case No. 87 of 2016 for the offence registered under sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 17.05.2016 by the informant, Dharmsheela Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the marriage of the victim was solemnized 8 years ago. It has further been alleged that on the issue of division of property, there was certain dispute between the accused side and on 16.05.2016, the information came that she has been killed and the dead body has been disappeared along with the lady. The 9 month old grown child was also missing. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner tried to impress
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34418 of 2025(2) dt.22-05-2025 2/2 upon this Court about the innocence of the petitioner.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that after 9 years, the present petition has been filed, the occurrence is of the year, 2016. He has further taken to this Court to learned Sessions Judge's order to show the anticipatory bail was disposed of on 17.03.2017 but neither the petitioner approached before the Hon'ble Patna High Court nor chose to surrender.
6. Considering the submissions aforesaid as recorded, no relief can be granted to the petitioner, it would be appropriate that the petitioner seeks regular bail.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) ajay/- U T