Manju Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59635 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-228 Year-2024 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna ====================================================== Manju Devi Wife of Manoj Kumar Resident Of Village- Lekhan Tola, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Dharmesh Kumar Shrivastava For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms.Suman Kumari Singh Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2024 1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of 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 petitioner along with her husband on 6-3-2024 came to his house at 11 AM and Manoj without any reason assaulted the mother of the informant causing injury on her head, further when son of the informant went to save his grand-mother, petitioner gave a loaded pistol to Manoj (her

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59635 of 2024(2) dt.18-09-2024 2/3 husband) who shot his son (Deepu) on right side of his waist and thereafter both fled and Manoj even fired in the air. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case, being wife of Manoj. It is submitted that no doubt an altercation had taken place in between Manoj and the family members of the informant in which both sides assaulted each other, it is also submitted that Manoj fired causing injury to son of the informant but then the petitioner came to be implicated with an allegation that it was the petitioner who gave pistol to Manoj. It is next submitted that it is very easy to implicate someone by alleging that on his/her order, the occurrence was committed or he/she provided the arms/weapon to the accused for committing the occurrence. It is also submitted that petitioner has been implicated in the instant case in order to coerce Manoj into submission.

5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59635 of 2024(2) dt.18-09-2024 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 trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 228 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T