Sabitri Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55661 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2024 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Sabitri Devi W/o Subedar Yadav R/o Village- Bara, Tola Kotiya, P.S.- Kako (Bhelawar), District- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-09-2025 Heard Mr. Ranjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Kako (Bhelawar) P.S. Case No. 340 of 2024 registered under Sections 80(2), 238, 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioner along with other family members had killed the sister of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submitted that petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased and she has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has clean

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55661 of 2025(2) dt.08-09-2025 2/2 antecedent.

5. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for pre-arrest bail. He submitted that the complicity of the petitioner in the alleged commission of offence cannot be denied, considering the fact that soon before her death, the deceased had informed her parents regarding ill treatment by her husband and her in-laws. The trial has proceeded and there is every probability of influencing the witnesses by the petitioner.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, the nature of allegation made in the FIR and the fact that the trial has proceeded and there is every probability of influencing the witnesses by the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on pre-arrest bail.

7. Accordingly, the present application stands dismissed.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Ashishsingh/- U T