Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Basmati Devi vs The State Of Jharkhand on 19 October, 2016

Author: Ratnaker Bhengra

Bench: Ratnaker Bhengra

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                                      B.A. No. 6798 of 2016


                Basmati Devi                                                                  -----   Petitioner
                                                          Versus
                The State of Jharkhand                                                       ------- Opposite party


                   CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
                 For the Petitioner                            :        Mr. V.S.Prasad, Advocate
                For the O.P.                                   :        A.P.P.


 03/19.10

.2016

1. Bail application has been filed on behalf of petitioner namely Basmati Devi who  is in custody in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No. 6 of 2016 corresponding to  G.R.Case no. 265 of 2016 for the offence registered U/Ss. 302/34 I.P.C.  

2. Learned   counsel   for   the   petitioner   has   submitted   that   only   on   the   basis   of  suspicion that there was some illicit relationship between the petitioner and husband of  the deceased petitioner has been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that  it appears from the F.I.R. that there was normal relationship between the informant and  his son­in­law as informant went to attend a family function in the house of his son­in­  law just before the occurrence. He has also stated that it is not possible for a father to  kill his own daughter so it is possible that the deceased had burnt herself along with her  daughter. 

3. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that  it   is  a   case  of   double  murder   and   it   is  indicated   in  para   12   of   the  case  diary   that   witnesses came to know from the neighbours that there was illicit relation between the  petitioner and the husband of the deceased. From para 17 of the case diary it appears   that one spray bottle  of kerosene oil was  found at the place of occurrence which was  intact. 

4. Having heard counsel for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances  of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the above named petitioner on bail hence, his   prayer for bail stands rejected.

 Nibha/                                                                                             (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)