Premsheela Devi Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75501 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-151 Year-2025 Thana- Raghunathpur District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Premsheela Devi Kumari Wife of Late Amarjeet Sahani @ Amarjeet Kumar Resident of Village- Sapahi Jatwa, Ps- Raghunathpur, Dist- East Champaran 2.

Dilip Sahani Son of late Lal Bahadur Sahani Resident of Village- Sapahi Jatwa, Ps- Raghunathpur, Dist- East Champaran 3.

Lalita Devi Wife of Dilip Sahani Resident of Village- Sapahi Jatwa, PsRaghunathpur, Dist- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastava, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr. Anant Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 30-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, informant and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5), 61(2), 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per prosecution case, on 04.06.2025, informant received information regarding murder of her son from the villagers and later on, she came to know that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners, killed her son and his dead body was recovered from a bush.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75501 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026 2/2 Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Petitioner no. 1 is wife, petitioner no. 2 is father-in-law and petitioner no. 3 is mother-in-law of the deceased and they have falsely been implicated in this case. As per post-mortem report, cause of death is due to drowning and no injury was found on the person of deceased and such, post-mortem report falsifies the prosecution case. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. Considering the nature of accusation, post-mortem report and clean antecedent, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bailbond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Raghunathpur P. S. Case No. 151 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T