Ravina Devi @ Raveena Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76500 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2024 Thana- AURAI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ravina Devi @ Raveena Devi Jagat Ray R/o Village - Prayagchak, P.S. - Aurai, Dist. - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rananjay Kumar, Adv.
Md. Sahid Javed, Adv.
Mr.Kumar Binode Bariar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Aurai P.S. Case No. 220 of 2024 (S.T. No. 425/2025) dated 12.10.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 238 read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant had gone outside for his livelihood. It is further alleged that on 04.10.2024 at about 9.00 P.M., his villager, namely, Bijali Das, came to his house and took his father Thaga Rai (deceased) to his house by alluring him for eating and drinking. The
2/4 informant's father had Rs. 2,50,000/- with him. It is further alleged that the co-accused Bijali Das committed murder of his father, Thaga Rai, with the assistance of his associates at his house after giving him food and took the said amount of Rs. 2,50,000/- from him. They also threw the dead body of his father in the running water for destroying the evidence. The villagers of the informant had seen the co-accused Bijali Das and his associates coming from the place of occurrence at 3.00 A.M.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the daughter-in-law of the deceased and she is not named in the F.I.R. No incriminating article has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has surfaced in the present case during the course of investigation on the disclosure made by some villagers. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner There is no eye witness to the alleged offence and only on the basis of suspicion, the petitioner has been made accused in the present case. It is further submitted that on the alleged date of occurrence the area of the petitioner was surrounded with flood and the deceased Thaga
3/4 Rai was very old person who used to live on the Bandh and on the alleged date of occurrence, he fell in the water due to flood and thereafter he lost his life which is evident from the postmortem report and no ante mortem injury was found either externally or internally on the dead body of the deceased. The informant came from outside and cremated the dead body of his father and thereafter has filed the present false case against the petitioner in a planned manner. It is further submitted that the alleged occurrence took place on 04.10.2024 and the F.I.R. was lodged on 12.10.2024 after a lapse of nine days and for the delay in lodging the F.I.R., no explanation has been given by the prosecution. The petitioner is a lady. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody in this case since 01.02.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the regular bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected by this court vide order dated 28.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27461/2025.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond
4/4 of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Aurai P.S. Case No. 220 of 2024 (S.T. No. 425/2025).
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) Gautam/- U T