Shobha Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1632 of 2017 (2) dt.07-06-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.1632 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -436 Year- 2016 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Shobha Devi W/o- Mahesh Paswan, R/O Gobersahi Anand Anand Nagar, P.S.- Sadar, Muzaffarpur, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Gajendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sri Sadanand Paswan, S.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 07-06-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned S.P.P. for the State.

This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 22.10.2016 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, S.C./S.T (POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in Sadar P.S. Case No. 436 of 2016, whereby the application for grant of regular bail to the appellant has been rejected.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant, who is a lady of clean antecedent, is innocent and has not committed any offence. In fact, altogether eighteen persons have been named in the F.I.R. and most of them belong to schedule caste including the appellant. There is no specific allegation against the appellant and she only happens to be the member of the mob. Moreover, co-accused, Golu Kumar and

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1632 of 2017 (2) dt.07-06-2017 Renu Devi, Niraj Paswan and Dasrath Ram, having more or less similar allegation have already been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 8356 of 2016, Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 95 of 2017 and Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 854 of 2016, respectively. Moreover, the appellant is in custody for the last nine months, therefore, the appellant may be enlarged on bail. Considering the nature of accusation against the appellant and the period of custody during the investigation period, I am of the view that the appellant deserves to be released on regular bail.

Let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand rupees only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (POA) Act, Muzaffarpur in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 436 of 2016.

This appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) Brajesh/- U T