Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57661 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2024 Thana- PAKARIBARAW District- Nawada ====================================================== Sunita Devi Wife Of Ravindra Yadav Resident Of Village - Devi Bigha, Pakaribarawan, P.S. - Pakribarawan, District - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anirudh Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajiv Nayan For the Informant :

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-09-2024

1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, the learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman. The informant (Dhiraj Kumar) alleges that on 24.04.2024 at 9:00 am, Pravesh Yadav had come to his village for Bidai of his sister when Ajay, Ranjeet, Pinki, Sunita (petitioner), Preeti came and started assaulting Pravesh on which the father of the informant intervened for pacifying them when it is alleged that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57661 of 2024(2) dt.11-09-2024 2/3 all the accused persons strangulated his father and assaulted him by lathi, danda and belt and when informant and his cousin brother Yogendra came to save the victim, they were also assaulted. Thereafter, they took the victim to the Primary Health Centre where the doctor declared the victim dead. The learned senior counsel submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same does not inspire confidence and appears to be vague and cryptic. It is also submitted that no reason for the occurrence has been alleged and the allegation of assault is also general and omnibus in nature. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a woman and she will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove her innocence.

4. The learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application but then are not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the allegations are vague and cryptic. The FIR does not assign any reason for the occurrence and the allegation of assault is also not specific.

5. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57661 of 2024(2) dt.11-09-2024 3/3 event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st, Nawada in connection with Pakaribarawan P.S. Case No. 187 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

6. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J.) Sudhanshu/- U T