Patna High CourtCR. MISC./45553/2016rejected

Sarbsati Devi @ Sarswati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2016-12-15Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.45553 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -34 Year- 2016 Thana -IMADPUR District- BHOJPUR ======================================================

1. Sarbsati Devi @ Sarswati Devi wife of Laxman Ram resident of VillageBihta, Police Station- Imadpur, District- Bhojpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-12-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Nobody appears on behalf of the State.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in Imadpur P.S. case No. 34 of 2016 under Section 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The father of the deceased alleged that his daughter was married to Saroj Kumar in the year 2015 but immediately after the marriage her husband and other family members started demanding additional dowry and the accused persons killed his daughter. The informant got information on 25.07.2016 that his daughter had been killed. He went to the house of his daughter but dead body of his daughter was not found.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.45553 of 2016 (3) dt.15-12-2016 2/2 petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased. No specific allegation of demand of dowry or torture is made against the petitioner. The deceased was suffering from different ailments. She gave birth to a child and she died her natural death and thereafter her cremation was held but from the pathological report, annexed with the bail petition, it appears that nothing abnormal was found. The deceased was suffering from sinusitis. The deceased died after one and half year of marriage and her dead body was disposed of hurriedly. Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T