Subdhi Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1824 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-143 Year-2019 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== SUBDHI DEVI Wife of Rajo Sah @ Rajendra Sah Resident of Village - Pateliya, P.S. - Bibhutipur, District - Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jagdish Prasad Singh, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 25-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 365, 342 & 366 A of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is that petitioner came at the house of the informant and brought Guriya Kumari at her house with assurance that should will return her back within one month but she did not return then the informant came at Pateliya where she knew that the petitioner in association with other accused sold her to Mukesh Sah with intent to marry her.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. She has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1824 of 2020(2) dt.25-02-2020 2/2 informant are own sister and on account of land dispute this false and frivolous case has been instituted. She has no criminal antecedent.

Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that the victim in her statement made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically named the petitioner as the accused involved in the occurrence and not named any other accused persons.

Considering the facts and circumstances of case and particularly considering the statement of the victim made under Section 164 Cr.P.C., I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court below within six weeks from today and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order on the same very date in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

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