Dhanapati Devi @ Dhanwati Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.63554 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -278 Year- 2016 Thana -BARGANIA District- SITAMARHI ======================================================

1. DHANAPATI DEVI @ DHANWATI DEVI, W/o Prabhu Mahto,

2. Pooja Kuamri D/o Prabhu Mahto Both R/o Village- Parsauni, Ward No. 9, P.O. & P.S.- Barganiya, DistrictSitamarhi, Bihar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saket Anand For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anita Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-02-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Barganiya P.S. Case No.278 of 2016 registered for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted that the allegation of assault is omnibus against ten accused, out of them five female and male members have been allowed regular bail by different benches of this Court. These petitioners being ladies are alleged to be members of the mob having clean antecedents and omnibus allegation.

The learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the submission.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.63554 of 2017 (3) dt.01-02-2018 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for bail is allowed and the above named petitioners, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within six weeks from today, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the likewise amount each to the satisfaction of learned Fast Track Court 2, Sitamarhi in connection with Barganiya P.S. Case No.278 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. No.3972 of 2016 (Sessions Trial No.244 of 2017), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C., with further conditions that:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court. (ii) The petitioners will not induce any witness or tamper with the evidence.

(iii) If the petitioners are found involved in future in similar type of allegation, the prosecution will have liberty to move for cancellation of bail. (iv) The petitioners shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make themselves available as and when required by the court and on the event of failure on their part to appear before the court below on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of their bail.

(Sanjay Kumar, J) Harish/- U