Savita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73019 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-408 Year-2015 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Savita Devi W/o Sagar Saw @ Sagar Samrat R/v- Naya Bazar, Durga Maharaj Gali, P.S.- Kabaiya, District- Lakhisarai ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bhim Sen Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 29-04-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, learned APP for the State.

Petitioner in the present case is seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with Lakhisarai (Kabaiya) P.S. Case No. 408 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and later on Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code was also added.

As per the prosecution story, after marriage of daughter of the informant, in-laws started torturing her daughter on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. It is alleged that on 07.06.2015 at about 04:00 P.M., husband, nanad and mother-in-law of her daughter poured kerosene oil on her daughter and father-in-law lit a match and set her on fire. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73019 of 2022(2) dt.29-04-2023 2/2 petitioner who is 57 years old is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the allegations are general and omnibus.

Mr. Ajay Kumar No. 2, learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State, considering that there is a specific allegation of commission of overt act against the petitioner, the petitioner was absconding so far since the year 2015 and the husband of the deceased has already been convicted in this case but because of non-appearance of the petitioner in the court below, the trial against her could not be taken up, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is, thus, refused.

Let the petitioner surrender in the court below and cooperate in course of trial. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) SUSHMA2/- U T