Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30541 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2022 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

MEENA DEVI W/o Polai Yadav @ Play Yadav R/o village- Dhattha, Ward No. 07, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur 2.

Kunti Kumari D/o Polai Yadav @ Polay Yadav R/o village- Dhattha, Ward No. 07, P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Rina Sinha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleges that on 21.12.2021, his daughter had gone to attend computer coaching classes along with her cousin sister Kajal and when they reached near Chorba Pokhar, they were kidnapped by five accused persons along with the petitioners and the occurrence was witnessed by Kajal Kumari.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30541 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 2/3 petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and have been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that the victim and Nitish were in love, and the victim on her own volition eloped with Nitish, it is next submitted that the date of occurrence is 21.12.2021 and the FIR came to be instituted on 4.01.2022 i.e., after a delay of thirteen days without any plausible explanation, it is next submitted that petitioners are mother and unmarried sister of Nitish with whom the victim was in love, it is next submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that mother and sister would help her own son and brother to commit an occurrence. It is also submitted that only to force Nitish into submission, the present case has been instituted with false allegations against the petitioner. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30541 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 3/3 pending/successor court in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 03 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) HarshPandey/- U T