Mangri Devi @ Dhotaniya Devi @ Dhotiniya Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10993 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2020 Thana- CHANAN District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== MANGRI DEVI @ DHOTANIYA DEVI @ DHOTINIYA DEVI W/o Baleshwar Koda Resident of Village- Chormara, P.S.- Barhat, District- Jamui. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Md. Irshad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 19-07-2021 In view of sudden resurgence of COVID-19 infection there is limited functioning of the High Court and therefore the matter has been listed for consideration through virtual mode. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
This Court would expect that the petitioner's Counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office.
Petitioner seeks bail in Chanan PS Case No 86 of 2020, registered under Section 364(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 16, 18 & 20 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. As per the prosecution case, three persons of village Mananpur had been kidnapped by two FIR named and 35-40
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10993 of 2021(5) dt.19-07-2021 2/3 unknown miscreants.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of petitioner has come during course of investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Ranjit Kora. It is further submitted that from perusal of FIR, it is apparent that one of the victim, who returned namely Ravindra Rajak, has not been examined. His statement was not recorded either before the police or under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Save and except suspicion and confessional statement of co-accused, there is no cogent material against the petitioner. Similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 13856 of 2021. Petitioner has got clean antecedent. She is in custody since 28.08.2020.
Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the rival submissions as also the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. 1st, Lakhisarai, in Chanan PS Case No. 86 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10993 of 2021(5) dt.19-07-2021 3/3 petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.
(ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if she fails to do so on two consecutive dates, her bail bond will be liable to be cancelled.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J) rakhi/- U