Rekha Devi And ORS. v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.58548 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -101 Year- 2015 Thana -SHIWAPATHI District- MUZAFFARPUR ======================================================

1. Rekha Devi Wife of Arvind Giri

2. Seema Devi Wife of Shivjee Sahani Both resident of village tengrari Tole Dhaphar P.s. Siwaipatti

3. Arjun Kumar Choudhary Son of Ram Laxan Choudhary, resident of village Jhapaha Udan, P.S. Ahiyapur, District Muzaffarpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Bansh Dubey For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-03-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Siwaipatti P.S. Case No. 101 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 120(B), 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that false and malicious allegation has been made against the petitioners, for the reasons best known to the informant. It is further submitted that there appears to be some rivalry between the two groups' one known as Suraj Jivika Gram Sangathan and other known as Ujala

Jivika Sangathan. Both organization have got their separate jurisdiction and have been functioning independently. It is further submitted that the allegation of misappropriation of money belonging to the informant's bank does not arise, as the cheques, in question, have been admittedly, issued by the authorized signatory of the Suraj Jivika Gram Sangathan. It is further submitted that due to some oblique motive, petitioners have been implicated in this case.

Learned counsel for the State after perusal of the case diary submits that save and except the allegation made in the FIR, there is no further cogent material in the case diary so as to implicate the petitioner in the present case. It is further submitted that different stories have been carved out at a different point of time by the informant.

In view of the patent contradictions present in the case diary and the role of the petitioners not being clearly described in the present FIR, let the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzuffarpur in

connection with Siwaipatti P.S. Case No. 101 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjana Mishra, J) Jagdish/- U T