2025:JHHC:16198 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.6421 of 2024 ------ Rinki Kumari, D/o Sanjay Choudhary, R/o Ward No. 11, Village Japla, Dharhara, PO and PS Hussainabad, District Palamau, Jharkhand … … Petitioner(s) Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … Opposite Party(s) ------ CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P. ----- 04/ 19.06.2025 Heard the parties. 2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending her arrest for offences registered under Sections 306/328/120B of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The allegation in the FIR is that the deceased was forcibly administered poison by this petitioner under some conspiracy. It is alleged that the petitioner used to collect money from this deceased and it has come on evidence that this petitioner took money in the account of one Priya Devi and thereafter misappropriated the entire money and forcibly administered poison to him as a result of which he died, so that the amount should not be returned to the deceased. 4. Learned A.P.P. representing the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail. 5. After hearing the parties, I find that the death happened on 29.03.2024 but the FIR has been lodged on 10.05.2024. Further from the argument of learned APP it is clear that the deceased was being brought to the hospital on 29.03.2024 on the ground that he is suffering as some poison might have been administered. 6. There is no physical injury which is apparent from the postmortem report. Viscera report has yet not been received 2025:JHHC:16198 2 and the same is not in the case-diary. It has further come to the notice that there was some love affair between the petitioner and the deceased who are distantly related which was opposed by others. It is stated that on the fateful day the petitioner went to the house of the deceased, who again went to the house of this petitioner and after returning he fell ill and on his way to the hospital he died on 29.03.2024. 7. Considering the fact that FIR has been lodged after one and a half month from the date of death and there is nothing in the postmortem report or the case-diary to suggest that it was a case of poisoning, this Court finds it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 8. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of her surrender or arrest, she shall 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 Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau, in connection with Hussainabad P.S. Case No. 101 of 2024, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his/her name or in the name of his/her ancestors in which he/she is having share and to that effect, he/she has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his/her share in the property. (ANANDA SEN, J.) Tanuj/Cp-3