Aarti Devi @ Arti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37242 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2022 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== AARTI DEVI @ ARTI DEVI Wife of Late Robin Yadav @ Late Rabin Yadav @ Karka Resident of village - Lakhminia, P.S.- Ballia, District - Begusarai. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sandip Kumar Gautam For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajendra Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-09-2022 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to remove defect (s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of four weeks on resumption of physical mode. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in a case registered under section 304 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act. As per the prosecution case, the informant received information that his brother Dilip Yadav was shot near the milk centre of one Bodhu Mahto. When the informant reached the place of occurrence, he saw that the co-accused persons were firing on his brother Dilip Yadav who was lying on the ground and the co-accused persons Kumar Yadav and Fanikant Yadav shot the deceased on his neck. Upon hearing the sound of firing, other co-accused persons arrived along with this Petitioner, and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37242 of 2022(2) dt.26-09-2022 2/2 this petitioner said that the pellets hit the deceased on the right spots and he was dead and asked the co-accused persons to flee away.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner is a lady. There is no allegation of firing against the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 14.02.2022.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Begusarai in connection with Baliya P.S. Case No. 48 of 2022.

The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) atul/- U T