Sarita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36072 of 2017 (3) dt.19-09-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.36072 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -422 Year- 2015 Thana -BARBIGHA District- SEKHPURA ====================================================== Sarita Devi wife of Rajbali Ravidas, Resident of Village-Belau, Police Station-Barbigha, District-Sheikhpura.

.... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 19-09-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2017 in connection with Barbigha P.S. Case No. 422 of 2015 for the offences alleged under Sections 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of the POCSO Act.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and even according to the F.I.R it was the son of the petitioner who have enticed the informant's daughter away. It is submitted that the petitioner is a lady with clean antecedents and her husband co-accused Rajbali Das @ Rajbali Ravi Das has been granted bail by this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 24021 of 2016. It is stated that investigation has already been completed and there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36072 of 2017 (3) dt.19-09-2017

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named 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 1st Additional District & Sessions Judge, Sheikhpura, in connection with Barbigha P.S. Case No. 422 of 2015, on the following 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 will 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. (Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/Chandran U T