Vindu Devi @ Bindu Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81603 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2025 Thana- RS P.S. District- Madhubani ====================================================== VINDU DEVI @ BINDU DEVI W/O MANOJ YADAV RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- BEHAT NORTH, WARD NO. 25, POLICE STATION- R.S. JHANJHARPUR, DISTRICT- MADHUBANI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Hriday Narayan Harshit, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-11-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S..

3. As per prosecution case, daughter of informant was married to one Jitendra Kumar Yadav about 15 years ago. It is alleged that Jitendra Kumar Yadav used to reside in Mumbai for work and all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, used to harass and torture the victim and on 29.05.2025, grand son of informant informed him that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including this petitioner, have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81603 of 2025(2) dt.27-11-2025 2/2 committed murder of his mother.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case due to family feud. As a matter of fact, the deceased herself committed suicide. Petitioner is a lady and claims clean antecedents.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he, along with other accused persons, used to torture and harass the victim and subsequently, committed her murder.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation and gravity of offence, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is rejected.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T