IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr. Misc. No.25269 of 2008 NIRMALA DEVI Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 19.09.2008 Heard. The case is lodged under Section 304(B) and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner is mother-in-law of the deceased. The informant, the father of the deceased, has alleged that he had married his daughter to petitioner’s son Akashdeep and cash and other articles were given in the marriage, but after the marriage the in-laws were not taking the deceased to her matrimonial house due to non- fulfillment of demand of motor-cycle and colour T.V and that when the informant gave a promise to give these articles after Duragaman the deceased was taken to her matrimonial house on Vidagiri. Further allegation is that the petitioner and other in-laws subsequently, started torturing and harassing the deceased saying that the demanded articles be given to them. The informant said that he had given Rs.25,000/- at the time of Vidai. Due to non-fulfillment of demand of those articles quarrels usually took place. The informant also alleged that his son-in-law i.e. Akeshdeep informed him on telephone that his daughter (deceased) died in night. The informant went to deceased’s Sasural, but he found that the dead body had already been cremated before his arrival. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, the mother-in-law of the deceased, is in custody since 25.02.2008. Further submission is that so far as this petitioner is - 2 - concerned, the allegation is of general and omnibus in nature. Learned Additional PP Mrs. Pushpa Sinha assisted by the advocate for the informant referred to paragraph 32 of the case, wherein I.O has recorded the statement of four witnesses, who have stated that on hearing hue and cry, as a result of quarrel in deceased’s Sasural they had rushed to the Sasural house of the deceased and had found that deceased’s husband (accused Akashdeep) had caught hold her neck and he was pressing the neck of the deceased and in the next morning they learnt that the deceased died and the dead body had been cremated in the very night itself. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far the question of assault or torture resulting in the cause of death is concerned, the witnesses have said about the husband (Akashdeep) having pressed the neck of the deceased. Learned counsel says that witnesses have not said about the petitioner accused having caused any assault on the deceased. The learned APP appearing on behalf of the State does not point out any other material against the petitioner. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, Nirmala Devi 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Pakribarawan P.S. Case No. 132 of 2006. Kundan (C. M. Prasad, J.)