Rukmani Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88204 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-312 Year-2024 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Rukmani Devi Sidheshwar bind Resident of Village- Mai, P.S-Rahui, DistrictNalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Anil Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-01-2025 1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2.
The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant with an allegation that the daughter of the informant was married to the son of the petitioner about 10 years back and after marriage, the accused persons including the petitioner used to assault and torture her daughter for dowry, further on 13-6-2024, the informant tried to contact his daughter on phone, but she could
2/4 not be contacted, accordingly he along with his family members came to the matrimonial home of his daughter and inquired from his son-in-law about the whereabouts of his daughter, when informant was informed that she had fled away somewhere, but on further inquiry, it transpired that the accused persons had killed his daughter and threw her dead body in the Ganga River with a view to conceal evidence.
4.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner, being mother-in-law, has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant based on suspicion. It is next submitted that the marriage was more than 10 years old, and in these 10 years, no case ever came to be instituted by the informant or his daughter alleging torture or assault. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the son-in-law of the informant had disclosed that his wife had fled somewhere, but then the informant, based on further inquiry, alleges that she was killed and thrown in Ganga, which is an aspect of investigation. It is next submitted that petitioner is separate in mess and property with her son, and the son-in-law of the informant is in custody. 5.
The learned APP and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail
3/4 application. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that during the course of investigation, it transpired that the dead body of the daughter of the informant was carried on an auto by her husband and other accused persons and some villagers, it has also come that the body was cremated, for which the husband and other accused persons had given Rs. 6,000/- to the Mortician. It is further submitted that if the privilege of the anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond, on which the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will not abscond, rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove her innocence. 6.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Rahui P.S. Case No. 312 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
7.
However, it is made clear that in the event, if the
4/4 Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner, despite giving assurance to this court, is not cooperating in the investigation, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
8.
It is further made clear that if charge sheet is submitted connecting the petitioner with the offence, in that event, the present anticipatory bail order shall lose its effect. 9.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned police station through the learned Trial Court. (Satyavrat Verma, J) SUMIT/- U T