Chinta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61307 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2024 Thana- INDUSTRIAL AREA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Chinta Devi wife of Late Jagnath Ray @ Late Jagarnath Ray Vill - Hilalpur P.S. - Industrial Area, Dist - vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Industrial Area P.S. Case No. 78 of 2024 dated 25.06.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant and his brother, Amarjeet Kumar were purchasing vegetables at Pethiya, in the meantime, the petitioner and the co-accused persons surrounded and abused them. On being objected, they started assaulting them. The informant and his brother fled away in the field, but the co-accused persons Ranjeet Kumar,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61307 of 2024(2) dt.10-09-2024 2/3 Pappu Kumar and Raushan Kumar fired from country made katta and pistol on the head, back and waist of the informant's brother leading to his death due to previous dispute under conspiracy with one another.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further submitted that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner of firing on deceased at the time of occurrence. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is a lady and she is in custody since 25.06.2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner above-named, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Industrial Area P.S. Case No. 78 of 2024.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61307 of 2024(2) dt.10-09-2024 3/3

7. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T