Santoshi Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.2712 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-346 Year-2024 Thana- THAWE District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Santoshi Devi Wife of Ranjit Baitha Village-Goplamath, P.S.- Thawe, District -Gopalganj ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Shrikant Ram Son of Late Sukhram Ram Village-Goplamath, P.S.- Thawe, District -Gopalganj ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Prerna Rishi, Advocate For the State :

Ms. Usha Kumari 1, APP For the Respondent No.2:

Mr. Najeeb Ahmad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2.

The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 06.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge XI-cum-Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Gopalganj whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Thawe PS Case No. 346 of 2024 instituted under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 238 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.

3.

Prosecution case, in short, is that co-accused

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2712 of 2025(5) dt.15-01-2026 2/3 persons along with two to three miscreants are alleged to have taken the informant's brother away and shot him dead and thrashed his head by bricks. It is further alleged that few days back, the informant's brother had worked at the house of the coaccused, Mukesh Kumar Singh for which Rs. 5000/- was due and when the deceased asked for the said money, he was murdered.

4.

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. Appellant is not even named in the FIR. The name of the appellant has transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, namely, Sujit Kumar. Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that the appellant has not taken the caste name of the informant in public view. Hence, no offence under the provisions of SC/ST Act is made out against her. The appellant has no intention to disgrace the image of the informant in public view. The appellant is in custody since 21.12.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Perusal of the case diary reveals that co-accused Sujit

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.2712 of 2025(5) dt.15-01-2026 3/3 Kumar, in his confessional statement, stated that the appellant made a WhatsApp call to Sikandar and called him to the orchard. The appellant in her confessional statement admitted the same and led to recovery of the concealed mobile from her house. The inquest report indicates homicidal death, and the post-mortem report confirms death due to haemorrhage and shock caused by injuries from a hard and blunt substance. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and there being involvement of the appellant, this Court is not inclined to allow the appeal. Appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

7.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

8.

However, appellant will be at liberty to renew her prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within a period of four months.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T