Savitri Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84461 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-379 Year-2023 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.

Savitri Devi W/o Jagdish Yadav R/o Village - Bhithra, P.S- Atri, DistrictGaya 2.

Jagdiah Yadav S/o Late Kurpi Yadav @ Late Mangar Yadav R/o Village - Bhithra, P.S- Atri, District- Gaya ... ... petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the petitioner/s :

Mr. Priyadarshi Pankaj Raj Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-04-2025 Heard Mr. Priyadarshi Pankaj Raj Anand, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 379 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 03.08.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 498(A), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, these petitioners along with other accused persons have killed the 6 years old son of the informant by strangulating him and also tried to kill the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84461 of 2024(3) dt.15-04-2025 2/2 petitioners are mother-in-law and father-in-law of the informant and the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and they have not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of material available on record and case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that the allegation is supported by the medical evidence and apart from that number of witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the fact that there is direct and specific allegation against these petitioners that they have committed murder of the son of the informant which is also supported by the medical evidence, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with Atri P.S. Case No. 379 of 2023 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T