Ranjna Devi @ Ranjita Devi @ Ransita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50403 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2021 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== RANJNA DEVI @ RANJITA DEVI @ RANSITA DEVI W/O NARESH PASWAN Resident of village- Purshotampur, P.S.- Bibhutipur, DistrictSamastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhola Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 09-12-2022 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 467 of 2021, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that while the husband of the informant was returning back to his house, he lost way and by mistake, he reached near the house of the petitioner, where he started shouting, whereupon the co-accused person, namely, Ranjana Devi i.e. the petitioner herein & her mother-in-law came out of the

2/4 house and raised an alarm, resulting in 50-60 villagers having arrived at the place of occurrence, whereafter, whereupon the husband of the informant was assaulted badly, resulting in his subsequent death.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, she has been falsely implicated in the present case, she is having a clean antecedent and she is languishing in custody since 18.5.2022. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the accused persons of having assaulted the husband of the informant, however, as far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation of any specific overt act having been engaged in by her and a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled qua her. It is also submitted that the father-in-law of the petitioner has also filed an FIR against the husband of the informant, alleging therein that he had committed theft in the house of the

3/4 petitioner.

Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also considering the fact that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the accused persons and as far as the petitioner is concerned, there is no allegation of her having engaged in any specific overt act, apart from the fact that she is having a clean antecedent and she is languishing in custody since a long time, I deem it fit and proper to direct for release of the petitioner on regular bail.

Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Rosera, District-

4/4 Samastipur in connection with Bibhutipur P.S. Case No. 467 of 2021.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U T