Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.40338 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-252 Year-2017 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== Urmila Devi Wife of Naresh Pandit Resident of Village - Musapur Ghatho O.P., Gatho, P.S. Sarairanjan, District - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Ansarul Haque ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-09-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the Informant. Petitioner seeks bail in Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 252 of 2017 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 304B, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation against the petitioner is of killing the daughter of the informant by setting her ablaze due to non fulfillment of demand of dowry.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that she has committed no offence and has been falsely implicated in this case. It has been further submitted that the petitioner is the Mother-in-Law of the deceased and living separately. Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 10.02.2018.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.40338 of 2018(3) dt.20-09-2018 2/2 Learned counsel for the Informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Samastipur, in connection with Sarairanjan (Ghotho) P.S. Case No. 252 of 2017, with following conditions:-

(1) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and her absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel her bail bond.

(3) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) ranjan/- U