Madhuri Kumari @ Madhvi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1446 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-596 Year-2021 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== MADHURI KUMARI @ MADHVI KUMARI WIFE OF BINOY KUMAR, D/O LATE RAM BRIKSH CHAUDHARY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- UTA MADARPUR, P.S.- JEHANABAD, DISTRICT- JEHANABAD ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad Sinha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 26.08.2022 in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No.596/2021, F.I.R. dated 20.09.2021, for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 328 of the IPC.
According to prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged to have committed murder of the wife of the informant by administering some poisonous substance in her mouth and shut her mouth till she swallowed. Thereafter she was brought to hospital where in course of treatment she died.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the police submitted charge sheet under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1446 of 2023(3) dt.22-05-2023 2/3 but the learned Judicial Magistrate, differing with the view, took cognizance of the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and she has falsely been implicated in the present case. In fact, the informant is not an eyewitness of the alleged occurrence and only on the basis of suspicion, the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that it appears from the F.I.R that the alleged date of occurrence is 09.09.2021 but the present F.I.R has been institued on 10.10.2021 after thought only to implicate the petitioner in the present case.
He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since 26.08.2022. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant further submits that the trial is going on and two prosecution witnesses have already been examined in the present case.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Jehanabad in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1446 of 2023(3) dt.22-05-2023 3/3 connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No.596/2021, subject to the following conditions:-
1. 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 on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
3. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) amit/- U T