Saroj Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.78732 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2018 Thana- GURUA District- Gaya ====================================================== Saroj Devi wife of late Vijay Singh, resident of village -Shankar Bigha. P.S. -Gurua, Dist.-Gaya.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. S. Jamil Akhtar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Amitesh Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Petitioner seeks bail in Gurua P.S. Case No. 167 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant is brother of the deceased who in his written complaint has stated that on 01.09.2018 at 11 a.m., he received an information on his mobile that his sister Sangita Devi has been killed by her husband and petitioner who is her sister-inlaw because of his husband Mukesh Kumar Singh was having illicit relation with the petitioner Saroj Devi. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that she is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to misunderstanding and suspicion. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 02.09.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.78732 of 2018(3) dt.13-02-2019 2/2 Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati, District Gaya in connection with Gurua P.S. Case No. 167 of 2018, with following conditions:- (1)Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Sanjay/- U T