Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20309 of 2016 Arising out of PS.Case No. -162 Year- 2015 Thana -NAYA RAM NAGAR District- MUNGER ====================================================== Sunita Devi, Wife of Sri Binod Mandal, resident of village- Dariyapur, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Jamalpur, District- Munger. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Suman Kumar Mishra, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : Mr. Bharat Bhushan (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-07-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner is languishing in custody since 14.12.2015 in connection with Naya Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 162 of 2015 for the offences instituted under Sections 365, 302, 201, 120(B) and 379/34 of the IPC.

The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 20.09.2015 at about 8.00 P.M., in the night, the husband of the informant went to Jamalpur saying that he is going to Jamalpur to meet with Chandan. Till 22.09.2015 her husband did not return nor any contact made on Mobile. She alleged that her husband used to talk with Amar Malakar regarding purchase of some land and she has suspicion that with regard to purchase of land her husband has

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20309 of 2016 (3) dt.20-07-2016 2/2 been made disappeared by some miscreants.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent. The petitioner is in custody since 14.12.2015 and the charge sheet has been submitted in the present case. There is no allegation of tampering with the evidence. There is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. Merely on the basis of suspicion the name of the petitioner has come in the present case. There is no circumstantial evidence to suggest the implication of the petitioner in the present case. The petitioner is a lady. On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. Her name has come in course of investigation.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M., Munger, in connection with Naya Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 162 of 2015. U.K./- (Sudhir Singh, J) U T