Rupa Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49525 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2024 Thana- PANDARAK District- Patna ====================================================== Rupa Devi W/O Prince Kumar @ Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Singh R/O Village- Puranbigha, P.S- Pandarak, Distt. Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rita Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 26-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Pandarak P.S. Case No. 11 of 2024 registered under Sections 328, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, on 17.01.2024, at about 8:00 p.m., son of informant namely, Prem Kumar had left the house but did not return home by night. Informant further alleged that on 18.01.2024, at about 06:00 AM, her villager namely Prince Kumar, brought her son in an unconscious condition and told that her son (since deceased) came at his house at about 03:00 AM and fell unconscious. Thereafter, the son of informant was taken to Barh Hospital, where the doctor declared him dead. Informant suspects that the co-accused Prince Kumar along with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49525 of 2024(3) dt.26-09-2024 2/2 his wife and this petitioner had done to death her son by administering him poison.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that informant is not an eye witness of the case and only on suspicion petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. As a matter of fact, son of informant was drug addict and died natural death. No specific allegation against this petitioner. During course of investigation, no material has come against this petitioner. Petitioner is a lady and has got clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that petitioner is named in the FIR. From bare perusal of FIR, it is apparent that son of informant was in the house of the petitioner at the dead of night, and there is no explanation as to what happened to the deceased at her house.

6. Having considered the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and nature of accusation, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) utkarsh/- U T