Rinku Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61235 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-64 Year-2022 Thana- KIUL District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Rinku Devi W/o Adesh Yadav, Resident of village- Singhchak, P.S.- Kiul, District- Lakhisarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Sr. Adv.
:
Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Adv.
:
Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP.
For the Informant :
Mr. Dr. Anjani Prasad Singh, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 24-02-2023 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Case No.212 of 2022 arising out of Kiul P.S. Case No. 64 of 2022, lodged under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
As per prosecution case, there is allegation against the petitioner that she called the son of informant and when his son came out then all of a sudden two firing took place and his son fell down in Verandah, thereafter, they reached to the Hospital.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61235 of 2022(2) dt.24-02-2023 2/3 Upon query by Doctor from the deceased, he disclosed that Adesh Yadav fired on him and with Adesh Yadav 3-4 other persons are also there and the cause of dispute is the old enmity. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is absolutely no material against the petitioner namely Rinku Devi save and except that she is the wife of main accused. He further submits that from the contents of F.I.R., it transpires that only sound of petitioner for calling is there in the F.I.R. He further submits that antecedent of petitioner is clean and she is in custody since 23.04.2022.
Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is involvement of present petitioner in the said crime.
Upon specific query from the Court that how her involvement is present in the said crime, counsel for the informant submits that case diary may be called for. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above and the material on record, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) with two sureties of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61235 of 2022(2) dt.24-02-2023 3/3 like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District & Sessions Judge, Lakhisarai in connection with Sessions Case No.212 of 2022 arising out of Kiul P.S. Case No. 64 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 437(3) of Cr.P.C.
With this observation, the bail application stands allowed.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) ritik/- U T