The High Court at Patna granted bail to the petitioner, accused of kidnapping and murder, noting no material on record established her role in the crime. Bail was allowed upon furnishing a bond with two sureties.
Directed to be enlarged on bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.27892 of 2014
Arising Out of P.S. Case No. -186 Year- 2014 Thana -NAWADA District- NAWADA ====================================================== Parwati Devi W/O Pankaj Kumar Resident of village - Gariba, P.S. - Rajauli, District - Nawada. .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance: For the Petitioner/s : Mr. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
3 17-12-2014 Heard both sides.
The Petitioner, Parwati Devi, seeks bail in Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 186 of 2014 for the offence under Section 364(A) of the Indian Penal Code. Later on, Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code were added.
Karuna Sagar, the informant, alleged that her husband received a telephone call and went outside of his house. The call was of Pappu. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the wife of Pappu @ Pankaj Kumar. Except the aforesaid fact, there is no material on record to show that the petitioner was also involved in kidnapping of Vipin Kumar, the husband of the informant. Even during the course of investigation, Narendra Kumar and Mokhtar Ansari confessed their guilt and they did not disclose about any role played by the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.27892 of 2014 (3) dt.17-12-2014
2/2
petitioner.
Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.P.P. did not point out any material from the case diary about any role played by the petitioner Parwati Devi.
Having considered the facts that the name of the petitioner has come during the course of investigation but she is not alleged to have played any role in the kidnapping of Vipin Kumar, the husband of the informant, nor in his killing, the petitioner, named above is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Nawada in Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 186 of 2014.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J)
Dilip/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner meets the conditions for enlargement on bail given the lack of material showing her involvement in the kidnapping or killing of the victim.
What the requirements are for the petitioner to furnish bond with sureties to secure her release.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Parwati Devi
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
