Suman Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36678 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-391 Year-2020 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL DistrictBegusarai ====================================================== 1.
SUMAN DEVI W/o Late Mahesh Yadav @ Maheshwar Prasad Yadav Yadav Resident of Village - Sandalpur, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, Distt.- Munger. 2.
Nibha Devi @ Nisha Devi D/o Late Mahesh Yadav @ Maheshwar Prasad Yadav Resident of Village - Sandalpur, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, Distt.- Munger. 3.
Vinita Devi @ Babita Devi W/o - Himanshu Chandra Resident of Village - Sandalpur, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, Distt.- Munger. 4.
Khusboo Kumari @ Anchal Sagar D/o Binoy Sagar and Niece of Sudhanshu kumar @ Vikas Kumar Resident of Village - Sandalpur, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, Distt.- Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sanjiv Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 12-01-2022 Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Ashok Kumar, learned APP for the State.
The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 391 of 2020 dated 16.12.2020 instituted for the offences under Sections 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
By order dated 24.11.2021, this Court had called for the case diary and had granted provisional bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36678 of 2021(4) dt.12-01-2022 2/3 to the petitioners.
The accusation in the FIR is that one Sudhanshu Kumar @ Vikas Kumar, son of petitioner no. 1 had kidnapped the younger daughter of the informant, who is also the sister-in-law of aforesaid Sudhanshu Kumar.
Learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner no. 1 is the mother of the son-in-law of the informant, whereas petitioner no. 2 is his sister. Petitioners no. 3 and 4 are the sister-in-law and unmarried niece of the son-in-law of the informant. It has been urged on behalf of the petitioners that except for their being related to Sudhanshu Kumar, who is the son-in-law of the informant, there is no other material to connect the petitioners with the offence. On the contrary, the petitioner no. 1 had earlier filed a case against the informant of this case with the charge of kidnapping of his own daughter and his son-inlaw and lodging this false case against him. The petitioner no. 1 is an old lady who is suffering from chronic renal failure. So far as the other petitioners are concerned, there is nothing on record to indicate their complicity in taking away the daughter of the informant. There is no other evidence in the case diary except what has been alleged in the FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36678 of 2021(4) dt.12-01-2022 3/3 Considering the aforenoted submissions on behalf of the petitioners and taking into account their gender, the provisional bail granted to them by order dated 24.11.2021 is hereby confirmed.
The petitioners shall remain on the same bail bonds.
The application stands allowed and disposed off accordingly.
(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U T