Allowed

Pinki Devi v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC20 Jul 2022CR. MISC./3903/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal miscellaneous matter arising from a case involving attempted murder and conspiracy, the High Court granted bail to the petitioner, a female associate accused in a firing incident, pending completion of trial subject to surety conditions. The court emphasized her clean antecedents and lack of specific allegations against her.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation in trial and no tampering with evidence.

Pinki 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.3903 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2021 Thana- BARHARA KOTHI District- Purnia

¶3

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

¶4

Pinki Devi Wife of Madhav Mandal R/O Village- Bela Pemu Dargah Tola, P.S.- Barhara (RAGHUBANCH Nagar), District- Purnia.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Mallick For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Murli Dhar ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 20-07-2022

¶12

Let the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks from today.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Barhara P.S. Case No. 329/2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

As per prosecution case, on 10.10.2021 the informant’s wife went to Badhar to bring the grass and on returning, his family members namely, Shambhu Mandal, Sunil Mandal and Madhav Mandal were behind the bush came suddenly and caught his wife and co-accused, Shambhu Mandal shot fire on her left temples and in the meanwhile co-accused Sunil Mandal shot fire on her head and coaccused, Madav Mandal also shot fire on her head after that victim died on the place of occurrence. They also fired on the informant but

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3903 of 2022(3) dt.20-07-2022 2/3

¶17

he saved himself. Occurrence took place due to land dispute between the parties which has been continuing since last five years. Petitioner is one of the associates of the alleged occurrence.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute among the family members. The petitioner is lady and nothing has come against her in course of investigation. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. He further submits that from perusal of the case diary several witnesses have supported the case and found no involvement and there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and specific allegation against coaccused, Shambhu Mandal, Sunil Mandal and Madhav Mandal who killed the informant’s wife by making firing. The petitioner is languishing in custody since 16.10.2021 and bears no criminal antecedent. Charge sheet has been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶19

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner as submitted, charge sheet has already been submitted in this case and there is no likelihood of tampering with the prosecution evidence and keeping in view clean antecedent of petitioner and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3903 of 2022(3) dt.20-07-2022 3/3

¶22

above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Purnea in connection with Barhara (Raghbanshnagar) P.S. Case No. 329/2021, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.

¶24

(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself.

¶25

(iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶26

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶27

amitkumar/-

¶28

U T

Pinki Devi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pinki 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sonu Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Samar Raj @ Monu Kumar Vs the State of Bihar

Sajivan Yadav @ Sajivan Singh @ Sanjivan Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Mohiba @ Mohiuddin Vs The State of Bihar

Bade Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manoj Mehta Vs the State of Bihar