Geeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16539 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2018 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Geeta Devi, Wife of Parshuram Sah, Resident of At - Seori, P.O.- Sarauv, P.S.- Rasoolpur, District - Saran at Chhapra 2.

Manisha Kumari, D/O- Parshuram Sah, Resident of At - Seori, P.O.- Sarauv, P.S.- Rasoolpur, District - Saran at Chhapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yashraj Bardhan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP For the Informant :

Mr. U.P. Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-06-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Rasoolpur P.S. Case No. 153 of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 376, 366, 354 of IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Allegation against the petitioner is that they allure the daughter of the informant and taken her to their house where they have sexually intercourse with the daughter of the informant and when she became pregnant, they assured that they will marry her with Aman Kumar, but they do not do so. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the whole case is false and concocted and they are the neighbours and the medical report does not support the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16539 of 2019(5) dt.25-06-2019 2/3 prosecution case and the statement of the victim under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. has not been recorded.

Heard learned A.P.P. and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant, who has opposed the prayer for bail on the ground that there are direct allegation against the petitioners. However, the learned APP has conceded that there is direct allegation against the petitioner Geeta Devi whereas petitioner Manisha Kumari is daughter of the petitioner Geeta Devi. Having heard both sides, in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, so far as, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner Geeta Devi, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to her, however, the she is directed to surrender before the learned court below and make prayer for regular bail, the same shall be considered by the learned trial court on its own, without being prejudiced by order of this Court.

So far as, petitioner no.2 Manisha Kumari is concerned, let petitioner, above named, in the event of her 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) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-X, Saran at Chhapra, in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16539 of 2019(5) dt.25-06-2019 3/3 connection with Rasoolpur P.S. Case No. 153 of 2018, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

With the aforesaid, this application is disposed of. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T