Rani Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54204 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2024 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Rani Devi Wife Of Sakchan Yadav Village- Araria, PS- Parbatta, (Maraiya), Dist- Khagaria 2.
Priti Devi Wife Of Bhavesh Yadav Village- Araria, PS- Parbatta, (Maraiya), Dist- Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shekhar Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 31-08-2024 1.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2.
This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Parbatta (Maraiya) PS case no. 86 of 2024, disclosing offences punishable under Section 307 and other allied sections of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.
3.
The prosecution story, as per the First Information Report, is that on 28.02.2024, demarcation of land of the informant was being done through the Anchal Amin. In the meanwhile, the accused persons named in the F.I.R. arrived there with deadly weapons and attempted to kill the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54204 of 2024(2) dt.31-08-2024 2/3 It has further been alleged that accused Ramdhari Yadav @ Muso Yadav fired upon the informant, however the bullet did not hit the informant.
4.
Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. and they have been made accused during the course of investigation by the police. Learned counsel further submits that there is previous land dispute between both the parties. The land which was being demarcated belongs to the side of the petitioners, which was purchased by husband of petitioner no. 1. He next submits that no body sustained injury, as would be evident from F.I.R. itself. He also submits that petitioners are ladies and there is no criminal antecedent against them, however, after lodging of the present F.I.R., another F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioners and others by cousin brother-in-law of the informant on 14.03.2024.
5.
Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the nature of allegation and the fact that land dispute is existing between them, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6.
This application is, accordingly, allowed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54204 of 2024(2) dt.31-08-2024 3/3 7.
Let petitioner, abovenamed, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in connection with Parbatta (Maraiya) PS case no. 86 of 2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) rinkee/- U T