Savitri Devi @ Baliyabali v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11744 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2020 Thana- HASANPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== SAVITRI DEVI @ BALIYABALI Wife of Pappu Mahto Resident of VillageMoti Asthan, P.S.- Hasanpur, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Madan Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 26-10-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 120B & 201 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution case, the father of the informant, who left his house on 02.05.2020 did not return and was not be found in spite of search, as such the matter was reported to the police and the FIR was registered. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. She is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. No incriminating article has been recovered from her conscious physical possession. The allegation levelled

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11744 of 2021(4) dt.26-10-2021 2/3 against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. There is nothing in the record indicating the complicity of the petitioner in the occurrence barring her confessional statement which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law. Co-accused, namely, Mukesh Kumar has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 07.10.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No.19139 of 2021. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 16.05.2020.

Learned APP for the State opposed the bail petition.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with S.T. No.171 of 2020, arising out of Hasanpur P.S. Case No.94 of 2020, subject to the following conditions :

(1) One of the bailors will be his own blood relative, preferably, father, mother, brother, sister and/or his wife.

(2) The petitioner shall not indulge himself in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11744 of 2021(4) dt.26-10-2021 3/3

(3) The petitioner shall remain physically present in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned court concerned.

(4) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded and make himself available and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T