Sunaina Devi @ Lalo Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Sunaina Devi @ Lalo Devi Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Conditional bail granted: release on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. Ixth, Muzaffarpur, subject to four stated conditions (family-member bailor with bona fide document; attendance on every trial date with cancellation after two consecutive absences; no witness inducement or evidence tampering; desistance from further offences).

Issue for consideration

Whether petitioner Sunaina Devi @ Lalo Devi, held in custody in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024 for offence under Sections 80, 238, 3(5) B.N.S., may be released on bail notwithstanding opposition by the State through the learned APP.

Ratio / Principle

This Court extended the privilege of bail with conditions, weighing the facts and submissions put forward by the parties together with the circumstance that the husband is in custody, the petitioner is mother-in-law and a lady, and she has undertaken to diligently appear in trial.

Key takeaways

Petitioner ordered to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. Ixth, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024.ratio¶19
Bail granted subject to conditions: (i) one bailor shall be a family member of the petitioner providing an official document showing bona fides; (ii) petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court on each and every date, failure on two consecutive dates without plausible reason entailing cancellation of the bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) petitioner shall not induce, promise or threaten witnesses or tamper with evidences, failing which the State may take steps for cancellation of bail bonds; (iv) petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State may seek cancellation.ratio¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted (conditional). Patna High Court Crim. Misc. No. 82982 of 2024 (Rajiv Roy, J.), decided 04-12-2024: petitioner Sunaina Devi @ Lalo Devi, wife of Sushil Paswan, resident of Madhurapur, Rampurhari, Muzaffarpur — described in court as mother-in-law, a lady living separately — was in custody since 21.07.2024 in Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024, offence cited under Sections 80, 238, 3(5) B.N.S.; FIR lodged 20.07.2024 by informant Niraj Singh, who alleged the deceased had been married to Vidhyasagar Paswan in 2022 and tortured for dowry, the killing coming to light on the fateful day. Learned APP opposed bail, submitting that as mother-in-law she cannot exonerate herself from the accusation. Weighing the submissions, that the husband is in custody, her status as mother-in-law and lady, and her undertaking to appear diligently in trial, the Court ordered release on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. Ixth, Muzaffarpur, subject to conditions: (i) one bailor a family member furnishing an official bona fide document; (ii) appearance before the Trial Court on each and every date, failure on two consecutive dates without plausible reason entailing cancellation by the Trial Court itself; (iii) no inducement, promise or threat to witnesses nor tampering with evidences, failing which the State may move for cancellation; (iv) desistance from further criminal offences. Application allowed.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82982 of 2024

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-134 Year-2024 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur

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

Sunaina Devi @ Lalo Devi Wife of Sushil Paswan Resident of Village - Madhurapur, Police Station - Rampurhari, District - Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md Ejaz Akhtar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER

2 04-12-2024

Heard Mr. Rupesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024 for the offence under Sections 80, 238, 3(5) B.N.S. of the Indian Penal Code lodged on 20.07.2024 by the informant, Niraj Singh.

As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that the deceased was married to Vidhyasagar Paswan in the year 2022 but was always tortured for dowry and on the fateful day, came to know about the killing, which led to the FIR.

It is the case of the petitioner that she is mother-inlaw, an aged person, living separately, nothing to do with the daily affair of the couple, the husband is in custody and she has already suffered by being in custody since 21.07.2024 and if

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82982 of 2024(2) dt.04-12-2024 2/3

granted bail, shall be diligently appearing in trial.

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail submitting that she being mother-in-law, cannot exonerate herself from the accusation.

Taking into account the aforesaid facts/submissions put forward by the parties coupled with the fact that the husband is in custody, she is mother-in-law, lady and has undertaken to diligently appear in trial, this Court is inclined to extend her the privilege of bail with conditions.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. Ixth, Muzaffarpur in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 134 of 2024 subject to the following conditions:

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

(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 reason will entail cancellation of her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82982 of 2024(2) dt.04-12-2024 3/3

promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;

(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of her bail bonds.

With the aforesaid observations, the application is

allowed.

(Rajiv Roy, J)

Vijay Singh/-

U T