IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.39627 of 2009 ASHA DEVI WIFE OF PREMCHAND MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE JAMAILA, P.S. RUDRAPUR, DISTT. MADHUBANI. ------- PETITIONER. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- For the petitioner : Mr. Prafull Kr. Jha, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, A.P.P. -------------- 3. 23/12/2009 It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that during pendency of the application, the case has been committed to the Fast Track Court No. 4, Madhubani, being Sessions Trial No. 260 of 2009. In view thereof, learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make correction in the prayer portion of the application with regard to the aforesaid. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is an accused in a case instituted under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the name of the petitioner has surfaced in the First Information Report only on account of suspicion as the deceased was allegedly last seen with the petitioner three months back from the date of lodging First Information Report. It is also stated that in her self incriminating confessional statement recorded by the Police, she has allegedly accepted illicit relationship with the husband of the deceased and the deceased put objection due to which she with the help of her husband and 2 son had murdered the deceased. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no evidentiary value of the self incriminating confessional statement recorded by the Police. However, it would not appeal to any prudent person that petitioner’s husband and son had helped her in commission of the murder of the deceased in order to facilitate the illicit relationship of the petitioner with the husband of the deceased. Petitioner is a lady and stated to be in custody since 15.5.2009. It is submitted that allegedly the deceased disappeared on 8.2.2009 and it is further alleged that she was last seen with this petitioner, but, still when she did not come back for three months, no information was given to the Police by any family members and subsequently, after one skeleton was found, the petitioner has been named in the present manner which is an after thought. Learned counsel for the State submitted that according to the allegation in the First Information Report, the petitioner was last seen with the deceased. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Fast Track Court No. 4, Madhubani, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 260 of 2009 arising out of Rudrapur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2009 subject to the conditions that the petitioner should be well represented during course of trial on 3 each and every date and if she fails to remain present on two consecutive dates without her presence being dispensed with by the court concerned in accordance with law, the concerned could shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of her bail bond. S.Ali (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)