Kiran Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19081 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-273 Year-2017 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

KIRAN DEVI Wife of - Vinod Ray @ Binod Ray Resident of Village - Pakariya, P.S. - Harsidhi, District - East Champaran. 2.

Vinod Ray @ Binod Ray Son of - Lal Babu Ray @ Lalbahadur Ray Resident of Village - Pakariya, P.S. - Harsidhi, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar No.1, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 27-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 447, 323, 307, 324, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent, petitioner no.1 is a woman, petitioner no. 2 is own brother of the informant, petitioner no.1 is wife of petitioner no.2 and the informant alleges that on the date of occurrence, the petitioner no.2 gave farsa to Chunnu Singh and asked him to assault the informant on which Chunnu Singh assaulted him causing injury on his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19081 of 2022(2) dt.27-09-2022 2/3 head, it is next alleged that later the informant came to know that Chunnu Singh fraudulently has purchased land which fell in the share of the informant by getting a sale deed executed by the petitioner no.2 on false identification of Mukesh. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case, it is further submitted that petitioner no.2 and informant are own brother and on account of land dispute, the informant falsely implicated his brother by alleging that it was he who gave farsa to Chunnu Singh who assaulted, it is next submitted that as far as petitioner no.1 is concerned, allegations against her are ornamental in nature.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Harsidhi

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19081 of 2022(2) dt.27-09-2022 3/3 P.S. Case No. 273 of 2017 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T