Sangita Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50971 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2024 Thana- BATH District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Sangita Devi W/O Ashok Yadav R/O Village- Mirhatti, P.S- Sultanganj, Distt.- Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Suman Kumari Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA ORAL ORDER 21-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Bath P.S. Case No. 57 of 2024 dated 16.04.2024 instituted for the offence punishable under Section 302, 307, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on the alleged date and time of occurrence, the informant along with Mukesh Kumar Singh and Karelal @ Sachidanand Singh went to the field. On reaching there, they saw that the petitioner along with other accused persons was filling wheat straw in the jute bag which was lying in the field of Mukesh Kumar Singh. On protest, some altercation took place between the parties. In the meantime, coaccused, namely, Mithun Kumar came there and he along with co-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50971 of 2024(2) dt.21-08-2024 2/3 accused Pawan Yadav and Rabu Yadav started firing, due to which Mukesh Kumar and Karelal sustained fire arm injury. Consequently, Mukesh Kumar died at the spot due to fire arm injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is specific allegation against co-accused Mithun Yadav, Pawan Yadav and Rabu Yadav, who fired at Mukesh Kumar Singh and Karelal due to which they sustained injury. Later on, Mukesh Kumar Singh died at the spot. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that she was only filling the wheat straw in the sack without permission or payment of the said straw. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the F.I.R. shows that there is no any whisper against the petitioner which connects her to the crime. The reason behind the false implication of the petitioner is that the land of the petitioner is adjacent to the land of the informant and there is a land dispute between them, due to which the name of the petitioner has been dragged in this case. Lastly, it has been submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50971 of 2024(2) dt.21-08-2024 3/3
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest / surrender of the petitioner within a period of six weeks from today, in connection with Bath P.S. Case No. 57 of 2024, he will be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1st Class, Bhagalpur subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C., (Khatim Reza, J) premchand/- U T