Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37401/2024bail rejected

Minta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2024-09-06Mr. Justice Purnendu Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37401 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-487 Year-2023 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Minta Devi Wife of Late Vanshi Mahto R/O Village - Fanda, P.S.- Paroo, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Hemant Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-09-2024 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No.487 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(b) and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code .

3. The allegation made in the FIR against the petitioner is that she has illicit relationship with co-accused, Saroj Kumar Mahto, who is the husband of the deceased and the petitioner has played main role in killing the daughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that a false allegation has been made against the petitioner being neighbour. Neither She had played

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37401 of 2024(2) dt.06-09-2024 2/2 any role in committing murder of the deceased nor she has illicit relationship with Saroj Kumar Mahto.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioner and the petitioner having illicit relationship with the husband of the deceased, namely, Saroj Kumar Mahto, she participated in committing murder, I find that the complicity of the petitioner in commission of serious offence can not be ruled out.

7. Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

durgesh/chn (Purnendu Singh, J) U T