Urmila Devi v. Central Bureau Of Investigation Through CBI Acb, Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26943 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2019 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== URMILA DEVI WIFE OF CHANDESHWAR PRASAD YADAV RESIDENT OF- VILLAGE- MADARPUR POST- HILLALPUR P.S.- GANGA BRIDGE, DISTRICT- VAISHALI AT PRESENT R/O- N.C. GHOSH LANE, YARPUR, P.S.- JAKKANPUR, DIST.- PATNA ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION THROUGH CBI ACB, PATNA BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjiv Sharan, Adv.

For the C.B.I :

Mr.Avanish Kumar Singh, Adv.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 07-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects within four weeks of resumption of normal court proceedings. In the eventuality of non-removal of defects within stipulated period, the office will place the matter before the Bench.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable u/s 109 IPC and section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(b) of PC Act, 1988 as amended by PC (Amendment) Act 2018 and Substantive offences thereof.

Allegedly, husband of the informant has acquired huge

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26943 of 2022(2) dt.07-09-2022 2/3 assets, both movable and immovable, either in his name or in the name of his family members including his wife (petitioner), which is disproportionate to all known sources of income, which he cannot account for.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. She has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner is wife of co-accused Chandeshwar Prasad Yadav, who is in custody. There is no specific overt act against the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner runs some business for earning and all the income shown in the ITR must be considered as their valid and legal assets. After investigation, C.B.I. submitted charge sheet against the petitioner and co-accused. Learned counsel argues that petitioner is a lady and married to the main accused and has no specific overt act against her, as such, she may be granted anticipatory bail.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, since there is no specific overt act against the petitioner, let her be released on bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26943 of 2022(2) dt.07-09-2022 3/3 today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with RC 19(A)/19, Special Case No.1/20, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) pallavi/- U T