Reena Devi @ Reena Kumari And ORS v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.8210 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-301 Year-2018 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran ======================================================
1. REENA DEVI @ REENA KUMARI, wife of Vinod Sharma Resident of village-Bhatora, P.S. Taraiya, District-Saran
2. Vinod Sharma @Vinod Kumar Sharma, Son of Late Vishnudeo Sharma Resident of village-Bhatora, P.S. Taraiya, District-Saran
3. Ashutosh Sharma @ Ashutosh Kumar, Son of Vinod Sharma Resident of village-Bhatora, P.S. Taraiya, District-Saran
4. Sandhya Kumari, Daugther of Vinod Sharma Resident of village-Bhatora, P.S. Taraiya, District-Saran ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Mukesh Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 13-02-2019 This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Taraiya P.S. Case No. 301/18, disclosing offences under Sections 323, 379, 420, 406, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation as per F.I.R is that son of informant has given Rs. 75,000/- to the petitioners, who are blacksmith for making grill but neither the grill was prepared in time nor the amount was returned and, thereafter, petitioner no. 4 Sandhya Kumari made call on the mobile phone of son of the informant and when the informant enquired from petitioner no. 2 as to why his daughter called his son, upon which, the petitioners assaulted the son of informant and petitioner no. 2 snatched away golden chain worth Rs. 50,000/- and petitioner no. 1 threw chilli powder on the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8210 of 2019(2) dt.13-02-2019 2/2 eye and body of the son of informant and they snatched away Rs. 15,000/- and further petitioner no. 3 pointed katta on the chest of the son of informant and fired.
Submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is delay of two months in lodging the F.I.R. by the informant only with a view to save his skin from the case filed by petitioner no. 1 with respect outraging the modesty of his daughter and no allegation as alleged in the F.I.R has ever taken place. Furthermore, no injury was found on the person of the injured. Heard learned A.P.P. also.
Having heard both sides, in view of the above facts, this application is allowed. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate -IX, Saran, Chapra in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 301/18, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U T