Renu Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5620 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2018 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Saharsa ====================================================== RENU DEVI, wife of Chhedan Sah Resident of Village-Nauhatta, P.S.- Nauhatta, District-Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Chandra Mohan Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 07-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 406, 409, 420 IPC registered in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 103 of 2018.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and in any event the withdrawn amount of Rs. 13,80,000/- was immediately deposited into the account of School Shiksha Samiti with the Central Bank of India. It is denied that an amount of Rs. 15,20,000/- has been withdrawn, rather the correct amount withdrawn is Rs. 13,80,000/- which has since been deposited. The husband of the petitioner, who is said to have made the withdrawal was taken into custody and since been granted bail by this Court. The petitioner has no criminal antecedents except in one other case of different nature, in which she is made accused.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5620 of 2019(2) dt.07-02-2019 2/2 CJM, Saharsa, in connection with Nauhatta P.S. Case No. 103 of 2018 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. and also subject to the following further conditions: i. That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner. ii. That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial.

iii. That the petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make herself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iv. The petitioner shall be well represented in Court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned.

v. The Court below shall satisfy whether the total amount withdrawn was only Rs. 13,80,000/- and not Rs. 15,20,000/-, as alleged. (Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T