Lado Khatoon @ Afsana Khatoon v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27016 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2019 Thana- ANTI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
LADO KHATOON @ AFSANA KHATOON W/o Sohrab Khan Resident of Village-Jehana, P.S.-Anti, District-Gaya.
2.
Bugli Khatoon @ Raushan Khatoon D/o Md. Minhaz Resident of VillageJehana, P.S.-Anti, District-Gaya. 3.
Rani Khatoon @ Raoksar Khatoon D/o Md. Minhaz Resident of VillageJehana, P.S.-Anti, District-Gaya. 4.
Praween Khatoon D/o Minhaz Resident of Village-Jehana, P.S.-Anti, District-Gaya.
... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rama Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER 06-11-2020 . As of now the Courts have not resumed normal physical hearing, the matter has been listed today for consideration through Video Conferencing.
The learned counsels are appearing and making submissions from their residence. The Court Master and Secretary are also part of this virtual court proceedings from their homes, all with the aid of audio visual technology.
Mr. Bhanu Pratap, APP is appearing for the State as it is submitted that the brief has been allotted to him by the office of Advocate General.
Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for the State.
. This Court would expect that the petitioner's Counsel would honour his undertaking in the instant proceedings regarding supply of requisite court fee etc. within two weeks from the date he is called upon to do so by the office.
Petitioners apprehend arrest in Anti. PS Case No. 70 of 2019 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354, 307, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the IPC.
The informant has alleged that while she was vending
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27016 of 2020(2) dt.06-11-2020 2/2 vegetables, co-accused Sonu Alam driving a Tempo dashed against her and all the vegetables were scattered. It is alleged that co-accused Sonu fled away only to return with his sisters (petitioners) who thereafter assaulted the informant.
It is submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the main accused Sonu Alam has been allowed anticipatory bail in ABP No. 93 of 2020 by the court below on 1.6.2020. The petitioners being sisters of Sonu Alam have been implicated due to some dispute of the informant with the petitioners' family at the village level. The petitioners being female are apprehending arrest for such false implication. They are having no criminal antecedent. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Having considered the rival submissions this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, let the petitioners above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of ACJM VII, Gaya in Anti PS Case No. 70 of 2019 subject to all conditions as laid down in Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code as also the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner. (ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled.
SNkumar/- (Madhuresh Prasad, J) U T