B.A./8324/2026 of MINA DEVI Vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND on 6 October 2026

( 2026:JHHC:29939 )

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 8324 of 2026

Mina Devi aged about 71 years widow of late Bishwanath Chaudhary, Resident of village-Kailan, P.O.-Township, police station Bhawnathpur, District Garhwa … … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand

…

… Opp. Party --- CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY ---

For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedy, Advocate

For the Opp. Party : Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, Advocate

---

07/06.10.2026 Heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody in connection with Bhawnathpur P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025, for the offences registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of the B.N.S. 2023, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nagar Untari.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a lady aged 71 years. The marriage between the son of the petitioner and the deceased had taken place way back in the year 2015. The alleged incident is of 02.12.2025 and as per the allegation the petitioner, her son and husband of the petitioner all three of them have committed murder of the deceased by pressing her throat and also administered poison to her.

4. The learned counsel has further submitted that in the re- statement it has been alleged that immediately after marriage, the husband of the deceased used to assault his wife and was also demanding some dowry, however the marriage had taken place way back in 2015.The learned counsel has further submitted that as per the FIR, the deceased had seen the petitioner in compromising position with another person in her home which led to the aforesaid incident.

5. The learned counsel has further submitted that the deceased was treated in a number of hospitals and the petitioner is the mother-in-law and has been falsely implicated in this case. The learned counsel has

( 2026:JHHC:29939 ) 2

submitted that charge sheet has been submitted for the alleged offence under Section 103(1)/61(2) of BNS against all the accused persons.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party-State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the FSL report reveals that poison was found.

7. To this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the cause of death is cardio respiratory failure.

8. The learned counsel for the State has also submitted that prior to death, the deceased was seen by the neighbours in the field upon hearing alarm from and the petitioner was seen standing by the side of the deceased. The learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail.

9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner was seen with the deceased immediately prior to the death in the field near the house and material witnesses including the neighbour are yet to be examined, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner above named is rejected.

10. At this, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that considering the age of the petitioner some observation may be made so that the trial is expedited.

11. Accordingly, state is directed to ensure that the witnesses are promptly produced before the court.

12. The learned counsel for the State is directed to communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police of the concerned District and to the Director, Prosecution to ensure compliance.

13. Let this order be communicated to the concerned court through FAX/e-mail.

(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.) Dated: 06.10.2026 Uploaded on 09.10.2026 Binit/