Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 60034 (PAT)

Nishu Devi v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./49577/2025 · 2025-08-06

Prabhat Kumar Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49577 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRA District- Patna ====================================================== Nishu Devi W/O Raju Kumar Resident of Behrawan Chakiya, PS- Pipra, Distt-Patna(Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Gajendra Prasad Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Ms/Mrs. Meena Singh, A.P.P. Mr Adarsh Kumar, Rabish Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 2 06-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 126(2), 115, 109, 85 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. As per the prosecution case, informant’s daughter was married to one Kaju Kumar in 2023. Soon thereafter, her in- laws including her husband as well as the petitioner started torturing her for non-fulfilment of dowry demand. On 29.1.2025 at about 7 pm, all the FIR named accused persons including this petitioner sprinkled Mobil and set the informant’s daughter on fire as a result of which she sustained severe burn injuries. Thereafter, she was taken to the PMCH, Patna for treatment where she narrated the incident to the informant. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49577 of 2025(2) dt.06-08-2025 2/2 submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner is gotini of the victim and has no concern with the victim as she is separate in mess and business. Petitioner claims clean antecedent. 5. Learned counsel for the State and the informant oppose the prayer for bail. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that she, in connivance with other family members, sprinkled mobil on the informant’s daughter and set her on fire causing severe burn injuries. It is further submitted that during investigation, several witnesses have supported the prosecution case. 6. Considering the nature and gravity of allegation, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. shashi/- (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) U T