Nitu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.50837 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -459 Year- 2012 Thana -PHULWARI District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Nitu Kumari Wife of Randhir Kumar @ Ranjit Kumar @ Tutu Resident of village - Usari, Police Station Pali, District Jehanabad .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravi Shanker Pankaj For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Manoj Kumar - 1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 22-06-2017 Heard both sides.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Phulwarisharif P.S. case No. 459 of 2012 under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant got information about the illness of his wife and when he went to his house there was a crowd near his house and he knew that his wife was dead. Foul smell was coming out from the dead body. The informant alleged that he kept Nitu Kumari, daughter of his brother-in-law (Sarhu), and brought up her but she also fled away with her belongings. Dr. Amrendra Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that it is true that petitioner was having love affairs with a boy but the deceased was not objecting. The

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.50837 of 2016 (7) dt.22-06-2017 2/2 deceased happens to be aunt (Mausi) of the petitioner. The petitioner left the house much earlier after solemnizing marriage with the boy, Randhir Kumar. The deceased was killed by the other family members of the husband of deceased and they have falsely implicated the petitioner but from perusal of the records as well as the case diary, it appears that during the course of investigation almost all the witnesses, including the brother of the informant, has stated that the informant was keeping the daughter of his brother-in-law (Sarhu) and the informant and his wife brought her up. The petitioner fell in love with Randhir Kumar but the deceased was objecting and that is why Randhir Kumar and the petitioner killed the wife of informant and fled away. Having considered the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T