Sumitra Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.70396 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-123 Year-2019 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.

SUMITRA DEVI Wife of Narayan Mandal Resident of Village - Bhutauli Malpa, P.S. - Chautham, Dist. - Khagaria.

2.

Rajeev Kumar @ Rajeev Kumar Mandal Son of Narayan Mandal Resident of Village - Bhutauli Malpa, P.S. - Chautham, Dist. - Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shekhar Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 19-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Chautham P.S. Case no. 123 of 2019 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The FIR has been lodged by the Branch Manager of Bajaj Allianz Life Insurance Company Limited, in which it is alleged that one Deo Nandan Kumar had purchased a life insurance police for a sum of Rs. 10,37,000/-. It is alleged that one Rakesh Kumar who was brother of the assured person has been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70396 of 2021(2) dt.19-07-2022 2/3 made nominee under the insurance policy. Soon after commencement of the policy, a death intimation of the life assured was sent ot the Company, however, in course of the inquiry into the genuineness of the death claim, it was found that there was a conspiracy to play a fraud upon the Insurance Company and hence the death claim was rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioners have no concern with the claim of the nominee. Petitioner is neither the proposal nor introducer not the identified the policy holder. No case is made out against the petitioner. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of Bail.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Chautham P.S. Case no. 123 of 2019, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70396 of 2021(2) dt.19-07-2022 3/3 1st Class, Khagaria subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) sushma/- U