Munchuniya Devi @ Daiyje Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61620 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-337 Year-2022 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== MUNCHUNIYA DEVI @ DAIYJE DEVI WIF OF LATE MANIK RAM @ MANIK LAL RAM RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SOBHAN BADGAWON P.S. KHANPUR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 11-10-2023 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 337 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The marriage of the daughter of the informant is stated to have been solemnized with one Arjun Ram as per Hindu rites and rituals, whereafter the deceased victim lady had gone to her matrimonial home, however, subsequently, the accused persons including the petitioner herein, who is the mother-in-law of the deceased victim lady started making demand for dowry and on account of non-fulfillment of the same, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61620 of 2023(2) dt.11-10-2023 2/3 deceased victim lady was killed by the accused persons by strangulating her.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, she has been falsely implicated in the present case and she is having a clean antecedent. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against the accused persons including the petitioner herein and as far as the main accused is concerned, who is the husband of the deceased victim lady, he is also in custody, hence no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution in case the petitioner is granted the privilege of bail. 5.

Per contra, the learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the materials available on record as also considering the fact that a general and omnibus allegation has been levelled

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61620 of 2023(2) dt.11-10-2023 3/3 against the accused persons and the main accused i.e. the husband of the deceased victim lady is in custody, this Court finds that no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution in case the petitioner is granted the privilege of anticipatory bail, hence, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioner herein to the privilege of anticipatory bail.

7.

Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of her arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st class, Samastipur in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 337 of 2022, subject to the conditions as stipulated under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U T