Bandana Kumari @ Vandana Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.26028 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2017 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Bandana Kumari @ Vandana Devi, W/o Niraj Kishore Singh @ Pankaj Kumar, R/o Village- Fulpura, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Rina Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Anzarul Haque Sahara ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-08-2018 By an earlier order, dated 16.08.2017, passed in Criminal Misc. No. 28325 of 2017, the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail was rejected in connection with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 21 of 2017. The allegation is commission of offence punishable under Sections 341, 323, 326, 307, 498A, 120B and 304B of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is the wife of the elder brother of the deceased. While refusing to grant anticipatory bail, keeping in mind the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence alleged against the petitioner in the First Information Report, the petitioner was directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks. The petitioner did not surrender and has filed second anticipatory bail more than 8 months after rejection

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.26028 of 2018(2) dt.08-08-2018 2/2 of the earlier anticipatory bail application. My attention is being drawn to certain orders passed by this Court on anticipatory bail applications arising out of the same First Information Repor filed by other co-accused persons on 19.01.2018 in Criminal Misc. No. 3911 of 2018 and 15.03.2018 in Criminal Misc. No. 14602 of 2018. Based on the said orders, it is the plea of the petitioner that petitioner's second anticipatory bail application should be entertained.

I have perused the aforesaid orders dated 19.01.2018 and 15.03.2018. It does not appear that this Court's order, dated 16.08.2017, was brought to the notice of the Court, whereby the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail arising out of the same First Information Report, was rejected.

In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the second anticipatory bail application, which is, accordingly, rejected.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) arun/Ashish/- U