Allowed

Malti Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Aug 2022CR. MISC./29695/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna HC granted bail to the petitioner, mother of the deceased, in a murder case. The court found the petitioner was in custody and inclined to grant privilege of bail, subject to conditions regarding family surety, court appearance, and non-tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of family surety, appearance, and no witness tampering.

Malti Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29695 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-428 Year-2021 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Malti Devi Wife Of Amerika Baitha R/O- Village- Khora Koeri Tola, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Chanpatia, Dist.- West Champaran.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : None For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP ======================================================

¶7

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY

¶8

ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 03-08-2022

¶10

No one appears for the petitioner. On previous day

¶11

also learned counsel for the petitioner was absent. Learned APP represents the State.

¶12

Let the defect(s) be removed within four weeks of the complete start of the physical Court in normal course.

¶13

The case relates to Chanpatia P.S. Case No.428 of 2021 instituted under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

The allegation in the FIR is that the ‘ Chowkidar ’ informed that the dead body of an unknown lady has been discovered near the pond. The ‘ Chowkidar ’ tried to identified the body but fail to do so and accordingly the FIR was lodged.

¶15

Subsequently, during the investigation it was found that the dead body belong to the family of Bharat Baitha, he being the father of the deceased lady and it was further revealed

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29695 of 2022(2) dt.03-08-2022 2/3

¶17

that there had been some dispute and as the father tried to prohibit her from screaming to pressed her mouth in such a way that she ultimately died. Thereafter out of fear, they tried to dispose of the body in which the family and the neighbours were involved.

¶18

As per the averment made in the bail application, the petitioner is the mother of the victim girl and during investigation, there has been allegation of her father pressing the mouth leading to the death. She can be part of crime where body was removed for which Section 201 of the IPC can be attributed.

¶19

As per the bail application, for the alleged act of her, she is in jail since 09.03.2022 (as stated in para-13 of the bail application).

¶20

Taking into account the aforesaid fact that the petitioner is the mother of the deceased lady, charge-sheet stands submitted and she is custody since 09.03.2022 (as stated in para-13 of the bail application), this Court is inclined to grant her privilege of bail.

¶21

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Chanpatia

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29695 of 2022(2) dt.03-08-2022 3/3

¶23

P.S. Case No.428 of 2021 to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran at Bettiah, subject to following conditions:

¶24

(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of the petitioner, who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

¶25

(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reasons will entail cancellation of his bail by the Trial court itself;

¶26

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds;

¶27

With the aforesaid observations, the bail application is

¶28

allowed.

¶29

Prakash Narayan /- U T

¶30

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Malti Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Malti Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Kumar @ Jitendra Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Ashok Singh @ Ashok Kumar @ Ashok Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Arbind Kumar @ Arbind Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Nand Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Bharat Baitha Vs The State of Bihar

Amirka Baitha @ Amerika Baitha Vs The State of Bihar