Musomat Rashmi Kumari @ Khushbu Devi @ Rashmi Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67999 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-360 Year-2023 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East Champaran ====================================================== Musomat Rashmi Kumari @ Khushbu Devi @ Rashmi Devi Wife of Late Ravi Shankar Ram Resident of village - Ijra, P.S.- Areraj, District - East Champaran (Motihari) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Ms. Geeta Kumari, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B and 380 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, informant believes that this petitioner, along with co-accused persons, assaulted son of the informant as a result of which, he died during course of treatment.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner is none else than wife of the deceased and she has falsely been implicated in this case due to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67999 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 2/3 property dispute. As per prosecution case, the alleged occurrence took place on 23.02.2023 whereas the present complaint case was filed on 06.05.2023 i.e. after inordinate delay of more than two months and there is no plausible explanation for the same which itself makes the entire prosecution case doubtful. As a matter of fact, the deceased was suffering from Occipital Headache Gath, a brain tumor disease and his treatment was going on at Rachif Hospital, Gorakhpur since 06.12.2018. It is further submitted that during course of investigation, the statement of owner of the house in which the deceased and this petitioner were residing was recorded and the same is in Paragraph No. 39 of the case diary wherein he has categorically stated that the deceased fell down and this petitioner brought him to the hospital where, he died during course of treatment. The house owner is eye witness of the alleged occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, relationship between the parties and materials that have surfaced during
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67999 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 3/3 course of investigation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.
7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate Incharge, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Govindganj (Areraj) P.S. Case No. 360 of 2023, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T