Ram Sundari Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80770 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-312 Year-2023 Thana- BISFI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Ram Sundari Devi Wife Of Dev Narayan Purbey Resident Of VillageShibaul, Ps- Bisfi (PATAUNA), Distt- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mrs. Asha Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 19-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 272 and 273 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act pending in the learned court below.

3. As per the prosecution case, 75 litres of Nepali liquor is said to have recovered from the house of the petititoner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that there is petitioner is a poor women and she maintain her life and her family from cultivation. He submits that at the time of occurrence petitioner's husband was sleeping in her house and the police was suddenly reached her house and arrested the petitioner's husband without examination.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80770 of 2023(2) dt.19-12-2023 2/2 He further submits that there is no recovery from the house of the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner has got one criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application.

5. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail application and submits that the recovery is made from the house of the petitioner. Hence, she does not deserve anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the recovery is made from the house of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Bisfi (Patauna O.P.) P.S. Case No. 312 of 2023. Accordingly, her prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) ajay/- U T