Pushpa Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59759 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2022 Thana- DURGAWATI District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== PUSHPA DEVI W/o Deenbandhu Tiwari R/o village and P.O.- Masaurha, P.S.- Durgawati, District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar Pathak For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-01-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No.130 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 304(B) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
All the FIR named accused persons including this petitioner, on non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, in furtherance of the common intention are said to have committed murder of the sister of the informant.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the petitioner has got no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59759 of 2022(2) dt.09-01-2023 2/2 criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail application. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the mother-in-law of the deceased and the husband and the fatherin-law of the deceased are already in judicial custody. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner by submitting that the brother of the deceased had earlier filed an informatory petition before the police regarding commission of torture and harassment to his sister by her in-laws.
Considering the nature of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) S.KUMAR/- U T