Sima Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20664 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-816 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.

Sima Devi, Wife of Sri Choudhary, Resident of Village - Kewatiya (Mahuary), P.O.- Kowath, P.S.- Agiawan Bazar, Distt.- Bhojpur (Arrah) at Present Flat No 35/36, Ganesh Nagar-2, nearGarodar nahar, P.S and P.o. - Limbut, Distt- Surat, Gujrat- 395012.

2.

Sima Devi, Wife of Munna Choudhary, Resident of Village - Kewatiya (Mahuary), P.O.- Kowath, P.S.- Agiawan Bazar, Distt.- Bhojpur (Arrah) at Present Flat No 35/36, Ganesh Nagar-2, nearGarodar nahar, P.S and P.o. - Limbut, Distt- Surat, Gujrat- 395012.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Din Bandhu Singh, Advocate Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Satradhan Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-07-2019 This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 816 (C) of 2018, disclosing offences under Sections 406, 420, 34 of IPC.

Prosecution story as per complaint petition is that the accused persons were working at Gujarat and they came to the house of the complainant and demanded Rs.10,00,000/- for making him partner in his business and assured that they will return the entire amount along with interest. On that, he has given Rs.2,00,000/- in the account of Munna Chaudhary through NEFT and Rs.15,000/- and Rs.2,00,000/- and altogether he has given Rs.7,50,000/- to the petitioners, but they have returned only 3,00,000/- and the rest of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20664 of 2019(4) dt.05-07-2019 2/2 amount, they did not return in spite of several demands. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that there is not a single iota of evidence against these petitioners are concerned, either they have received the money or they are participating with the transaction. Moreover, they are ladies. Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also, who opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that petitioners were instrumental in getting the amount paid by the complainant.

Having heard both sides, considering the above submission, this application is allowed. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-VI, Danapur, District Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No. 816 (C) of 2018, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sunil Shukla/- U T