Mansi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63903 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2023 Thana- SARAI District- Vaishali ====================================================== Mansi Kumari D/O Umakant Sah, W/O Rahul Sah Resident of VillageEnayatpur Prabodhi, P.S.- Sarai, District- Vaishali. At Present Vill.- Gumati, P.S.- Rajapakar, Dist.- Vaishali.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pranav Kmar, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-10-2024

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rabindra Kumar learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that his son was in love with the petitioner who was married to Rahul Sah on 28.11.2022. Further, petitioner even after marriage used to call his son (Kundan Kumar) to her matrimonial home. On 29.06.2023 petitioner called and asked his son to come on which he went to the matrimonial home of the petitioner which was objected by her mother-in-law, who complained to the mother of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63903 of 2024(2) dt.23-10-2024 2/3 and the mother of the petitioner called the informant and requested him to call his son back, accordingly, the informant sent his elder son to fetch back Kundan from the matrimonial home of the petitioner and, accordingly, Kundan came back. It is next alleged that on the same day i.e. 29.06.2023 the brother of the petitioner threatened Kundan on phone that he will be killed. It is next alleged that on 30.06.2023 while the informant was sleeping after returning from Kolkatta when he heard a sound at 02:00 p.m., accordingly, his wife went out and informed that Kundan has been shot.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant based on suspicion. It is further submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that as to why the petitioner would have got the son of the informant killed at his home when she could have got the occurrence committed at her matrimonial home or at any other places.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63903 of 2024(2) dt.23-10-2024 3/3 within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sarai P.S. Case No. 177 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T