Patna High CourtCR. MISC./50488/2015bail granted

Soshila Devi @ Sushila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2015-12-21Mr. Justice Jitendra Mohan Sharma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50488 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -111 Year- 2014 Thana -GAUNAHA DistrictWESTCHAMPARAN(BETTIAH) ======================================================

1. Soshila Devi @ Sushila Devi Wife of Chhathu Ram Resident of village - Murli Bharahwa, P.S. Gaunaha, District - West Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 21-12-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 111 of 2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304B, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner, being mother-in-law of the deceased, is F.I.R. named accused in this case with general allegation. Submission is of false implication and that the husband and other in-laws have faced trial vide S.Tr. No. 73 of 2015 and they have been acquitted vide judgment dated 26.06.2015 as the informant and other witnesses have not supported the prosecution version vide annexure-2.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50488 of 2015 (2) dt.21-12-2015 2/2 The learned A.P.P. fairly submits that the petitioner is mother-in-law and husband and other in-laws have been acquitted. In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner is also directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Learned J.M. 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran arising out of Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 111 of 2015 subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on her part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) sushma/- U