Premsheela Kumari @ Premsheela ... vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 4457 Patna

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 37210 of 2020
   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2020 Thana- AKBARNAGAR District- Bhagalpur
 ======================================================

Premsheela Kumari @ Premsheela Devi, Female, aged about 60 years, Sadanand Yadav @ Murli Yadav @ Bhutali Yadav, Resident of Village- Srirampur, PS-Akbarnagar, District- Bhgalpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Advocate For the State : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 04-09-2021

The matter has been heard via video conferencing.

2. Heard Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, learned

counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey,

learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as

the 'APP') for the State.

3. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with

Akbarnagar PS Case No. 27 of 2020 dated 07.03.2020,

instituted under Sections 304(B)/328/34 of the Indian Penal

Code.

4. The matter has been listed in terms of order dated

24.08.2021, by which, in view of the conduct of the Senior

Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur and the concerned In-charge Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37210 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021

of the FSL at Bhagalpur, they were required to be present and also

submit their show cause. Today, the Court finds that though both

the officers are present but show cause has been filed only on

behalf of Senior Superintendent of Police Ms. Nitasha Guria,

whereas there is no show cause on behalf of Mr. Awani Kant

Trivedi, the In-charge Director, Regional Forensic Science

Laboratory, Bhagalpur. He has only written a letter addressed to

the Sub- Registrar, Patna High Court, Patna under Memo No. 682

dated 01.09.2021.

5. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhagalpur has

tendered her unqualified and unconditional apology for such

conduct and has also stated that in future, she will be more

attentive so that no such mistake occurs. She has further stated

that departmental proceeding has been started against the erring

police officials and the same would be taken to their logical

conclusion.

6. Having regard to the aforesaid, the Court is inclined

to accept the apology tendered by the Senior Superintendent of

Police, Bhagalpur.

7. Accordingly, the matter against her stands consigned.

8. Coming to the conduct of the In-charge Director,

Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Bhagalpur as he has not Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37210 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021

filed any show cause in the matter, the Court finds it to be a

blatant violation of the specific order to file show cause, which

has not been done.

9. At this juncture, Mr. Awani Kant Trivedi, the In-

charge Director, Regional Forensic Science Laboratory, Bhagalpur

tendered unconditional and unqualified apology submitting that

due to some misconception, he has not filed the show cause.

10. Having regard to the apology tendered, though the

Court was of the opinion that strict view be taken, but keeping in

mind that justice should be tempered with mercy, the Court

accepts the apology tendered by Mr. Awani Kant Trivedi, the In-

charge Director, Regional Forensic Science Laboratory,

Bhagalpur.

11. Accordingly, the matter against him also stands

consigned.

12. Coming to the merits of the case, the FIR filed by

the mother of the deceased alleges that she was married to the son

of the petitioner on 08.03.2019 and was living in the matrimonial

home and her daughter used to talk with her under fear because

her husband used to torture her and the further allegation is that

the father-in-law as well as the petitioner, who is the mother-in-

law of the deceased also used to torture her demanding dowry and Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37210 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021

finally, it is alleged that due to non-fulfillment of dowry, she was

killed by administering poison.

13. In view of the submissions of learned counsel for

the petitioner that no injury has been found on the body during

postmortem and cause of death has also not been opined and the

doctor has preserved the viscera for FSL examination, the Court

had asked learned APP to obtain the up-to-date legible photocopy

of the entire case diary as well as the inquest and postmortem

reports and the report from the Forensic Science Laboratory of the

viscera of the deceased.

14. Today, the said report is available, which discloses

that Aluminium Phosphide, which is also known as Celphos and is

highly poisonous, was detected in the sample sent of the viscera of

the deceased.

15. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

same is also indicative of the fact that she has committed suicide.

Learned counsel submitted that had the petitioner mixed the

substance in the food, the same would have been known as it has a

strong smell and, thus, could not have been fed to anyone without

the person knowing about the same. It was submitted that no

injury has been found on the body, which also indicates that there

is no foul play. Learned counsel submitted that the husband of the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37210 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021

petitioner i.e., father-in-law of the deceased had been arrested and

upon facing trial, was acquitted. It was submitted that the

informant has filed a compromise before the Court below that as

she was in a state of shock due to the death of her daughter, the

statements made in the FIR were incorporated by manipulating

her statement and that she did not want to proceed with the case.

Learned counsel submitted that the husband of the deceased i.e.,

the son of the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail by

order dated 09.08.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 7528 of 2021.

Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner has no other

criminal antecedent.

16. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner has been

absconding and her husband has faced trial.

17. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in

view of husband of the deceased having been granted anticipatory

bail and the father-in-law of the deceased, husband of the

petitioner also having been acquitted in trial and in the said trial,

the witnesses not having supported the prosecution case as also

the petitioner being a lady, the Court is inclined to allow the

prayer for pre-arrest bail.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37210 of 2020 dt.04-09-2021

18. Accordingly, in the event of arrest or surrender

before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner

be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/-

(twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each

to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, Ist, Bhagalpur in

Akbarnagar PS Case No. 27 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid

down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973

and further, (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of

the petitioner and (ii) that the petitioner shall co-operate with the

Court and police/prosecution. Failure to co-operate shall lead to

cancellation of her bail bonds.

19. It shall also be open for the prosecution to bring any

violation of the foregoing conditions by the petitioner, to the

notice of the Court concerned, which shall take immediate action

on the same after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

                     20.    The     petition      stands     disposed         of   in   the

           aforementioned terms.



                                             (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)


P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR
U
T