Nibha Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43655 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2023 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
NIBHA DEVI W/O JASVENDRA MUNI @ JASVINDAR MUNI R/O VILLAGE- VADIYA, PS. GOGRRI (PAURA), DIST. KHAGARIA 2.
SUMITRA DEVI W/O NANDAN MUNI @ SRINANDAN MUNI @ SHIRO MUNI R/O VILLAGE- VADIYA, PS. GOGRRI (PAURA), DIST. KHAGARIA 3.
SHIRO MUNI @ NANDAN MUNI @ SRINANDAN MUNI S/O RAMDHAN MUNI R/O VILLAGE- VADIYA, PS. GOGRRI (PAURA), DIST. KHAGARIA ... ... Petitioners.
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 05-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Gogri (Paura) P.S. Case No.136 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Section 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The daughter of informant is said to have been killed by the petitioners in association of other co-accused by assaulting her.
4. The petitioners are quite innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case as they are relatives of the husband of the deceased. The allegations levelled against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43655 of 2023(5) dt.05-12-2023 2/2 petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that they live separately from the deceased or her husband and they have no concern with them. It is further submitted that petitioner no.1 is the sister-in-law, petitioner no.2 is mother-in-law and petitioner no.3 is the father-in-law of the deceased. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para-3 of this application.
5. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioners is serious in nature, hence they do not deserve anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of case and on perusing the case diary along with the postmortem report, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioners is hereby rejected. However, if the petitioners surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail the learned Court below would pass order in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.
(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T