Sripati Devi @ Shripati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74067 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2024 Thana- PURNAHYA District- Sheohar ====================================================== Sripati Devi @ Shripati Devi W/O Vishundeo Sah @ Kishundev Sah @ Kishndev Sah R/O Village - Parsaunigop, ward no. -9, P.S. - Purnahiya, Dist.- Sheohar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 17-12-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Purnahiya P.S. Case No. 60 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 137(2), 140(3), 96, 3(5), 103(1) & 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

Prosecution case in brief is that the daughter of the informant-aged about 15 years-went missing and the informant is apprehending that one 'Dheeraj Kumar' is behind the disappearance of her daughter. Later on, dead body of deceased was recovered from a pond situated in the village. 4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 21-07-2024. Petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74067 of 2024(3) dt.17-12-2024 2/3 bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Petitioner is the informant of the case and later on, during course of investigation she has been made accused in this case on the basis of her confessional statement, and the same has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner, rather specific allegation is against the co-accused, namely, Satyendra Sah and Chunnu Raut.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner herself is the conspirator of the occurrence and in connivance with co-accused, Satyendra Sah and Chunnu Raut, they have committed murder of the daughter of the informant (petitioner herein), which fact is corroborated by the confessional statement of sister of the deceased mentioned at paragraph No. 52 of the case diary and the same fact is further corroborated with the confessional statement of the petitioner herself. It is next submitted that motorcycle used in disposing the dead body of deceased has been recovered,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74067 of 2024(3) dt.17-12-2024 3/3 which fact finds mention at paragraph No. 55 of the case diary. Cause of death stated in postmortem report is strangulation of neck.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence and taking into account the materials available in the case diary against the petitioner, which specifically suggest the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged occurrence, this Court, at this stage, is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is accordingly rejected. 8.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T