Kemti Devi @ Lakshmi Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64143 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-896 Year-2022 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== KEMTI DEVI @ LAKSHMI DEVI WIFE OF UMA SAO RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, NAYA BAZAR, LAKHISARAI, POLICE STATION - LAKHISARAI, DISTRICT - LAKHISARAI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

GEETA KUMARI WIFE OF VIVEK RAJ RESIDENT OF PATEL NAGAR WARD NO.17, P.S. - LAKHISARAI (KABAIYA), DISTRICT - LAKHISARAI ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Lakhisarai (Kabaiya) P.S Case No. 896 of 2022 dated 08.11.2022 registered for the offence punishable u/s 498(A), 341, 323,506,34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

4. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the petitioner and the co-accused persons subjected to torture her and her children physically and mentally. On account of nonfulfillment of demand of one lakh of dowry. It is further alleged that the petitioner and the co-accused persons tried to kill the informant

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64143 of 2023(4) dt.11-12-2023 2/2 by pressing her neck but she was rescued. The accused persons also threatened the informant to leave the house with her children.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is the mother-in-law of the Informant. She neither demanded any dowry nor tortured the informant. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhisarai in connection with Lakhisarai (Kabaiya) P.S Case No. 896 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Sudha/- U T