Jhunni Devi @ Jhunu Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59331 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2019 Thana- GURARU District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
JHUNNI DEVI @ JHUNU DEVI Wife of Navlesh Singh Resident of Village-Konchi, P.S.-Guraru, District-Gaya.
2.
Guddi Devi @ Jhunni Devi Wife of Shailesh Singh Resident of VillageKonchi, P.S-Guraru, District-Gaya. 3.
Chitrekha Devi @ Madhu Devi Wife of Subhash Singh Resident of VillageKonchi, P.S-Guraru, District-Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Vinod Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 25-09-2019 Heard both sides.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Guraru P.S. case No. 25 of 2019 registered under Section 147, 304B of the IPC.
The informant named 17 persons and alleged that his sister was married to Ramesh Singh, son of Parmanand Singh, village Kochi, P.S. Guraru about six years ago but after marriage her husband and other in-laws began to torture her. On 08.02.2019 his brother-in-law, husband of the deceased, took the sister of informant to his house and only after two days she informed him about torture given to her by her in-laws. On
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59331 of 2019(2) dt.25-09-2019 2/3 12.02.2019 the informant got telephonic information that his sister was killed. On such, the informant went there and saw dead body of his sister lying on a cot.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are sisters-in-law of the deceased. The informant altogether named 17 persons and this fact itself shows that the informant made the entire family members and relations of the husband of the deceased as accused. The deceased never complained any ill treatment during her marital relation with her husband during six years. No specific allegation is made against the petitioners.
The learned counsel for the State and the learned counsel for the informant, however, vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
It appears from perusal of the FIR itself that the informant named the petitioners along with other 14 persons and entire family members and relations of the husband of the deceased have been made accused but no specific allegation is made against the petitioners. The marriage of the deceased was solemnized six years ago and during her stay in her matrimonial house she never complained any ill treatment at the hands of the petitioners. From perusal of the order of the learned Additional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59331 of 2019(2) dt.25-09-2019 3/3 Sessions Judge, it appears that villagers have stated that the deceased had dispute with her husband.
Considering the facts aforesaid and nature of allegation made against the petitioners, the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest/ surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order are directed to be enlarged on bail on their furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in connection with Guraru P.S. case No. 25 of 2019, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) BKS/- U T