Siya Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39145 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2021 Thana- PIRI BAZAR District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== SIYA DEVI Wife of Kailash Das Resident of village- Masumganj, P.S.- Asarganj, District- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that petitioner used to come to her brother's house regularly, further on 11.01.2021, the petitioner again came to her brother's place where informant was also present, it is next alleged that they ate and went to sleep, in the morning she found her brother dead and petitioner missing from the house, thus alleges that petitioner might have poisoned her brother, it is also alleged that there was delay in instituting the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39145 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022 2/3 FIR as informant along with her husband came from outside late.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner and deceased were known and it appears that on 11.10.2021 petitioner had come to the house of the deceased where informant was also present.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39145 of 2022(2) dt.06-12-2022 3/3 deceased on 12.10.2021 then why the FIR was instituted on 18.10.2021 that in itself demonstrates that informant was not present at the place of occurrence.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court 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 the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Piri Bazar P.S. Case No. 160 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Shivam/- U T