Geeta Devi @ Geeta v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23714 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2021 Thana- CHHATAUNI District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Geeta Devi @ Geeta W/o- Ramdhani Singh Resident of village- house no 1711/12 Shimlapuri ludhiana Ps- Chini road Poney sat Aana DistrictLudhiana 2.

Ramdhani Singh S/o- Kailash Singh Resident of village- house no 1711/12 Shimlapuri ludhiana Ps- Chini road Poney sat Aana District-Ludhiana 3.

Chandan Singh @ Chandan S/o- Chota @ Chhota Singh Village- Sarsai Bujurg Ps- Khaga Dist- Fatehpur U.P 4.

Pappu Singh @ Pappu S/o- Kailash Singh Village- Hardon Ps- Khaga DistFatehpur U.P ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate Mr.Hemant Ray, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 05-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 80 of 2021 registered for the offences under Sections 307, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that as per FIR, the informant has been living separately from her husbandVijay Prasad who is alleged to have developed illegal relationship with Geeta Devi (petitioner no. 1). It has also been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23714 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 2/3 alleged in the FIR that the informant's husband- Vijay Prasad was regularly pressurizing the informant to sell the land which she had purchased with her own income from the shop which she is running and also to live with him. It has further been alleged that on 03.03.2021, three miscreants came to her shop as customers and one of them fired on her but she escaped and did not got hurt. In the FIR, she suspects that the firing on her has been done at the behest of her husband-Vijay Prasad and the petitioners are involved in the same.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. It is further submitted that none of the petitioners have any criminal antecedent and that they have simply been implicated in the present case by the informant based on her suspicion and that she has not identified anyone in particular. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners were not present at the place of occurrence.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the fact that these petitioners have been implicated in this case merely on the ground of suspicion and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23714 of 2025(2) dt.05-05-2025 3/3 that she has not identified any of the petitioners in particular who have committed the alleged offence, in such circumstances, let the petitioners, above named are directed to be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-(Twenty Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran in connection with Chhatauni P.S. Case No. 80 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) tusharika/- U T