Reetu Kumari @ Ritu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5252 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-786 Year-2021 Thana- KHAGARIA District- Khagaria ====================================================== REETU KUMARI @ RITU KUMARI W/o Dilip Kumar Resident of Village - Bapu Nagar Baluahi, Ward No.23, P.s.- Khagaria, Distt.- Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Gajendra Prasad Singh S/o Late Surya Narayan Singh R/o Village Bapu Nagar Baluahi Ward no 23 P.S Khagaria. District Khagaria. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP For the Informant/s :

Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that Mohan along with his nephew fraudulently sold the land which was in the name of his mother, it is next alleged that petitioner is a witness on the sale deed executed by Mohan.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5252 of 2022(3) dt.11-10-2022 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner is daughter-in-law of Mohan, it is also submitted that the land which was sold by Mohan belonged to his mother, it is further submitted that as far as the genealogy given by the informant in the FIR is concerned, the same for the present is being disputed, it is also submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting for the purposes of anticipatory bail then petitioner is merely a witness on the sale deed and being daughter-in-law she had no option but to sign without knowing the contents of the sale deed. Learned A.P.P.

for the State, learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, the learned counsel for the informant submits that the land belongs to the informant as the same was registered in the name of his mother but his own cousin brother i.e., Mohan fraudulently sold the land by executing the sale deed portraying that the land belongs to his mother when the mother of the informant was aunt of Mohan.

Be that as it may, in nature of allegation the petitioner, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5252 of 2022(3) dt.11-10-2022 3/3 (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Khagaria (Chitraguptanagar) P.S. Case No. 786 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that petitioner will co-operate in the investigation and will participate in the trial, in the event, if after investigation chargesheet is submitted. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Shivam/- U T