Champa Devi @ Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30102 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2022 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Samastipur ====================================================== Champa Devi @ Urmila Devi Wife Of Nanki Paswan Resident Of VillDihuli Ward No 14, Ps-Angarghat Distt- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Deepak Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 26-07-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A), 354(B), 341, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a woman having clean antecedent and the informant alleges that the accused persons, including the petitioner, confined her in their house on 29.10.2022 and petitioner said to marry her son, Bipin, further on 31.10.2022, she fled from the house and disclosed the occurrence to her parents and the villagers and thereafter the case was instituted.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30102 of 2023(2) dt.26-07-2023 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR it would manifest that the date of occurrence is 29.10.2022 and the FIR was instituted on 01.11.2022 i.e. after a delay of three days. It is further submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if what has been alleged in the FIR is true, that the informant was kidnapped by the petitioner and her family members, then why no FIR came to be instituted by the family members of the informant but the fact that after the victim returned after fleeing from the place of occurrence, as alleged, thereafter the FIR was instituted that casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution as to whether any occurrence in the manner, as alleged, had even taken place or not.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30102 of 2023(2) dt.26-07-2023 3/3 case is pending/successor court in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 82 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T