Lalita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83102 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2023 Thana- RATANPUR District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.

LALITA DEVI SON OF RAMSAGAR MEHTA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BAHORWA, WARD.12, P.S. - RATANPURA, DISTRICT - SUPAUL, BIHAR 2.

CHANCHAL DEVI @ CHANCHAL PRIYA WIFE OF RAUSHAN MEHTA @ VARUN KUMAR RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BAHORWA, WARD.12, P.S. - RATANPURA, DISTRICT - SUPAUL, BIHAR 3.

RAUSHAN MEHTA @ VARUN KUMAR SON OF RAMSAGAR MEHTA @ SAGAR MEHTA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE - BAHORWA, WARD.12, P.S. - RATANPURA, DISTRICT - SUPAUL, BIHAR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Anshul, Adv.

Mr.Kumar Prabhakar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 22-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 304(B), 498A, 34 of the IPC. 3.

The allegation against the petitioners is that they along with other accused persons have killed the daughter of the informant due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. 4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and have committed no offence.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83102 of 2023(2) dt.22-12-2023 2/3 They have been falsely implicated in this case due to grudge. No such occurrence, in the manner as alleged, has ever taken place. The allegation leveled against the petitioners is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners before the bar that the Petitioners are the in-law and family members of the in-law of the deceased and husband of the deceased is already in judicial custody. Petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since husband of deceased is already in custody, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Ratanpura P.S. Case No.41 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. 7.

However, before accepting the bail bonds of the petitioners, learned Court below would verify this fact as to whether the husband of the deceased is in judicial custody or not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83102 of 2023(2) dt.22-12-2023 3/3 and if it is found that he is not in custody, the bail bonds of the petitioners shall not be accepted.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T