← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./57522/2022bail rejected

Renu Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2023-02-09Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57522 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2022 Thana- ROH District- Nawada ====================================================== 1.

RENU DEVI Wife of Sanjay Yadav @ Bhado Yadav Resident of Village - Banshichak, Police Station - Roh, District - Nawada. 2.

Preeti Devi Daughter of Sanjay Yadav Resident of Village - Banshichak, Police Station - Roh, District - Nawada.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Birendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anand Kishore Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-02-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Roh P.S. Case No. 107 of 2022 registered for offence punishable under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per allegation, co-accused Sanjay Yadav thrashed the deceased on the ground, whereupon both the petitioners badly assaulted him with brick-bats and made him injured. After two days, he was admitted to hospital on complain of chest pain and he died.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the deceased felt pain in his chest after two days of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57522 of 2022(2) dt.09-02-2023 2/2 occurrence and the injury is of abrasion and simple in nature. On the other hand, the learned APP and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that both the petitioners badly assaulted the deceased and only after two days of the occurrence, he lost his life. Considering the above mentioned facts and circumstances, the petitioners do not deserve the privileges for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, it is rejected. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T