Patna High CourtCR. MISC./39422/2017rejected

Sita Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

2017-11-08Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Jha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.39422 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -261 Year- 2014 Thana -KUDHNI District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Sita Devi, Wife of Revindra Rai

2. Rajkali Devi, Wife of Basant Rai, Both resident of VillageRaghunathpur Basant, P.S. Kudhani, District- Muzaffarpur .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners : Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP 53 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 08-11-2017 Heard Mr. Nachidketa Jha, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and the Additional Public Prosecutor, for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Kudhani P.S. Case No. 261 of 2014 corresponding to Sessions Trial No. 46 of 2015 registered under Sections 307 and 326 and other sections of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners was earlier rejected vide order, dated 23.02.2015, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6781 of 2015.

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, again, moved for grant of anticipatory bail only because the informant in her, further, statement did not make any allegation against the petitioners that they threw acid and the injured did not name the petitioners, but, it appears from the perusal of the record that in the first information report, itself, the informant specifically made allegation against the petitioners that they threw acid, the prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.39422 of 2017 (3) dt.08-11-2017 2/2 23.02.2015, but, the petitioners remained absconding for more than two and half years and, thereafter, they file this anticipatory bail petition.

Considering the facts that in the first information report, itself, the informant made specific allegation against the petitioners also that they threw acid due to which three persons sustained burn injuries, hence, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to them.

Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) SA/- U √ T √