Rukmina Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.55399 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2017 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Rukmina Devi, Wife of Bindu Singh, Resident of Village-Delhua, P.S.- Dinara, District-Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. A.P.P.

Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-11-2017 Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor as well as Sri Surendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel, who has voluntarily appeared on behalf of the informant.

The sole petitioner, who is a lady, has prayed for grant of bail in connection with Dinara P.S. Case No.153 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently under Sections 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code was also added.

It was submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that on perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that save and except the fact that the petitioner has been arrayed as one of the accused, there is no substance in the F.I.R. to show as to whether the petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55399 of 2017(2) dt.17-11-2017 2/3 was one of the conspirators. He submits that in the F.I.R. it has been indicated that while the informant deceased in the evening after taking meal had come out for walking, this petitioner had said him that some one were calling and, thereafter, the informant proceeded and intercepted by accused persons, who fired on him. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged under Section 341, 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, after the death of the informant, Sections 302 as well as 120B of the Indian Penal Code was added.

Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioner has acted as liner and, as such, she is not entitled to be released on bail. He submits that it can be inferred that the petitioner had played role of conspirator.

Considering the nature of accusation as well as the fact that petitioner is a lady, there is no reason to further detain in custody. Accordingly, let the petitioner, namely, Rukmina Devi 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 S.D.J.M., Bikramganj, Rohtas in connection with Dinara P.S. Case No.153 of 2017 with conditions that (i) one of bailors must be blood relation of the petitioner (ii) during the trial, the petitioner shall remain present

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.55399 of 2017(2) dt.17-11-2017 3/3 before the trial court on each and every date. If continuously on two dates, without prior permission of the trial court she remains absent, her bail bond shall stand automatically cancelled.

(Rakesh Kumar, J) nawalkrs/- U T