The Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner as she was arrested under Sections 498A, 304B,120/34IPC: High court of Patna

The petitioner in connection with Maner PS Case No. 589 of 2016 dated 30.12.2016, was arrested under section 498A Indian Penal Code, “Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty.” section 304B, “Dowry death”, section 120, “Concealing design to commit an offense punishable with impris­onment”, and section 34 IPC, “Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention.”

This judgment was given in the high court of Judicature at Patna on the 27th of July 2021 by the Honorable Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah in the case of Arti Kumari v/s state of Bihar criminal miscellaneous No. 35586 of 2020, Mr. Krishna Singh represented as the senior advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Satya represented the state of Bihar as the additional Public Prosecutor, the proceedings of the court were held through video conference. The following are the facts of the case, the petitioner and her family members have been accused of killing her sister-in-law and her three minor children, the petitioner is reportedly the sister of the husband of the deceased, there has been an allegation of the brutal murder of putting them on fire.

According to the counsel for the petitioner, he held that such allegations are false because the facts that three minor children were murdered show that the family members have not played a role in the same as they are the children of her own brother, even though there have been some disputes with the sister of the informant there was no enmity with the minor children since there was some dispute between the couple, the counsel claimed that the sister of the informant (now deceased) committed suicide with her three children in the fit of anger, the counsel held that the husband of the deceased has been given bail after being custody and also the father in law of the deceased has been released on anticipatory bail by the bench of the high court, the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

The additional public prosecutor held that the body of the two children and the mother was fished out from the river and the body of the third child is yet to be recovered and based on the post-mortem, it showed that the death was due to burns he also held that the place of the incident took place on a bed where the deceased was burnt to death and the body was thrown into the river to destroy evidence, witnessed has also supported the prosecution version and the petitioner lived in the house because she was unmarried and various other circumstances prove that the petitioner was involved in the heinous crime.

The court concluded that “Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner.  Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed.”

Click here to read the judgment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *