Gauri Shankar Singh @ Gauri Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27691 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-627 Year-2020 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.
GAURI SHANKAR SINGH @ GAURI SINGH Son of Late Satya Deo Singh Resident of Village - Morsand, P.S.- Runni Saidpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi. 2.
Sunita Devi W/o Gauri Shankar Singh Resident of Village - Morsand, P.S.- Runni Saidpur, Distt.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party.
====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh, Advocate.
For the State :
Mr. Amitesh Kumar, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 31-08-2021 As prayed for, through Video Conferencing, let the learned counsel for the petitioners remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office vide its notes dated 17/19.04.2021, within four weeks of starting of the Court proceeding in physical mode in normal course.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioners, through Video Conferencing, submits that the petitioner no.1, namely, Gauri Shankar Singh alias Gauri Singh, has already been arrested by the police in this case and, as such, this application, in respect of the petitioner no.1, namely, Gauri Shankar Singh alias Gauri Singh, for granting him the privilege of pre-arrest bail has become infructuous and seeks permission
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27691 of 2021(2) dt.31-08-2021 2/3 to withdraw this application in respect of the petitioner no.1, namely, Gauri Shankar Singh alias Gauri Singh. Permission is accorded.
This application in respect of the petitioner no.1, namely, Gauri Shankar Singh alias Gauri Singh, is dismissed as withdrawn.
Now, only the petitioner no.2, namely, Sunita Devi, for granting her the privilege of pre-arrest bail is being considered, through Video Conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner no.2, namely, Sunita Devi, and the learned A.P.P. for the State, through Video Conferencing.
The petitioner no.2, namely, Sunita Devi, apprehends her arrest in connection with Runni Saidpur P.S. Case No.627 of 2020 registered under Sections 363 and 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The accusation is that Ritu Kumar, the neighbour of the informant Rashmi Kumari, enticed away the minor daughter of the informant in collusion with his other family members. On search, the minor daughter of the informant could not be traced out.
Learned counsel for the petitioner no.2, namely,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27691 of 2021(2) dt.31-08-2021 3/3 Sunita Devi, submits that the petitioner no.2, namely, Sunita Devi, being the mother of Ritu Kumar, who is said to have kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant, has falsely been implicated in this case. In her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the minor daughter of the informant has not disclosed the name of the petitioner no.2 Sunita Devi having her hand in her kidnapping. Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case, let the petitioner no.2, namely, Sunita Devi, in the event of her arrest or surrender by her within six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on her furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, in connection with Runni Saidpur P.S. Case No.627 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Accordingly, this application stands disposed of. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T