Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[ 2026:JHHC:26234] -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 3500 of 2026
Kaushalya Devi, W/o Laxman Yadav, aged about 39 years, Resident of Village-Padariya, P.O. and P.S. Devipur, District Deoghar.
..... … Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
..... … Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------ For the Petitioner : Mr. L.C. Roy, Advocate. For the State
: Mrs. Mohua Palit, A.P.P. ------ 03/ 31.08.2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2.
The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Devipur P.S. Case No. 12 of 2015 corresponding to G.R. No. 276 of 2015, registered for the offence under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Deoghar.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and false allegations are made against her of committing murder of the deceased. He next submits that false allegations are made against the petitioner of having the relationship with the deceased. On these grounds, he submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be provided to the petitioner.
4.
Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer and submits that the petitioner was in relationship with the deceased and the witnesses have supported the case in the case diary. On these grounds, she submits that anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.
5.
In the case diary, witnesses namely Pramila Devi and Kartik Yadav have stated that this petitioner was having the relationship with the deceased. Those witnesses have also stated that
[ 2026:JHHC:26234] -2-
the Skelton of the deceased was hidden in the sand, which has been subsequently recovered. Further the petitioner is not co-operating in the investigation, that has come in the case diary.
6.
In the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, her prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Dated:-31.08.2026 Amitesh/-