Ram Singari Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.44485 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -110 Year- 2014 Thana -GORAUL District- VAISHALI(HAJIPUR) ======================================================

1. Ram Singari Devi Wife of Rajendra Rai

2. Dinesh Rai Son of Rajendra Rai Both are resident of Village - Sihar, Bhatoliya, P.S. - Goraul, District - Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 28-04-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned APP.

Deceased, Pramila Devi died at her Sasural on account of which, a written report was filed by her father, Ram Ekbal Rai alleging inter alia that due to non fulfilment of demand of dowry, she was assaulted and then throttled to death. Furthermore, to avoid screening themselves, concealed the dead body.

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioners that petitioner no.1 is mother-in-law while petitioner no.2 is the husband. It has also been submitted that from perusal of further statement of informant, it is apparent that marriage took place 1314 years back and on account thereof, no offence under Section 304B of the IPC is made out. It has also been submitted that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44485 of 2014 (4) dt.28-04-2015 deceased was an idiot and quarrelsome lady and from the statement of witnesses, it is apparent that out of passion, she on her own, consumed poisonous substance and committed suicide and for that, none is responsible. So submitted that petitioners are entitled for grant of anticipatory bail.

Learned APP opposed the prayer.

Gone through the case diary. From perusal of the same, it is apparent that none is an eyewitness to occurrence and that being so, it was incumbent, at least, upon the petitioner no.2, the husband, on account of consistent disclosure by witnesses regarding his presence, to explain the cause of death, more particularly, in the background of the fact that dead body was removed before initiation of legal prosecution. That being so, there happens to be no cogent reason to accede to the prayer made on behalf of petitioner no.2, the husband, namely, Dinesh Rai and accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected. So far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, the witnesses have stated that there happens to be separate mess and business and accordingly, petitioner no.1, Ram Singari Devi, in the event of her arrest/surrender within four weeks, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of SDJM, Vaishali at

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.44485 of 2014 (4) dt.28-04-2015 Hajipur in connection with Goraul (Kathara)PS Case No. 110/2014, subject to the condition so enumerated under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) perwez U T