Guddi Devi vs State of Jharkhand

Heard the parties.

Defects as pointed out by the office are ignored. The petitioner is an accused in connection with S. T. No. 358 of 2019 arising out of Mohamadganj P.S. Case No. 42 of 2018 corresponding to G. R. No. 434 of 2019.

It has been alleged that the younger son of the informant was married to the petitioner. It has been alleged that on 19.08.2019, he had gone to the parental house of the petitioner along with the petitioner and on 03.10.2018, information was received about recovery of the dead body of the younger son of the informant. Suspicion was cast upon the petitioner and the in-laws of the deceased.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that there is no direct evidence on record and the petitioner has been implicated only on suspicion. He further submitted that the father of the petitioner namely, Chhotan Bhuiyan has been granted bail by this court in B. A. No. 5399 of 2019.

The petitioner is admittedly the wife of the deceased and it has come in course of investigation that she was having a love affair with one Rajendra Padahiya @ Nagendra Padahiya. The conduct of the petitioner being the wife is also to be noted as the police has apprehended her from a railway station as she was neither found in her matrimonial house nor in her parental house. There is nothing on record which would indicate that her husband getting traceless or being murdered had led to some concern shown by the petitioner and such fact situation therefore indicates strong suspicion of the petitioner having taken part in the murder of her husband. The case of the petitioner cannot be equated with the case of Chhotan Bhuiyan, who as has been stated above has been granted bail by this court.

Regard being had to the above, I am not inclined to allow this application and the same is hereby rejected.