Rubi Kumari @ Ruby Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28874 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-492 Year-2018 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== RUBI KUMARI @ RUBY KUMARI W/o Upkar Kumar @ Chintu Resident of Village - Gokhula Rupauli, P.S.- Paroo, Dist.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Vijay Kumar Dubey Son of Gauri Shankar Dubay Resident of Village - Kataru, P.S.- Paroo, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 03-05-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 492 of 2018 registered under Sections 406/420 of the I.P.C. and 138 of the N.I. Act pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.-III, West, Muzaffarpur.

Submission is that petitioner is a teacher in the primary school, who has got no criminal antecedent. She is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is also submitted that the petitioner was cheated by her husband. She has filed a case against her husband alleging therein that her husband has assaulted and snatched her pass book as well as cheque book.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28874 of 2019(2) dt.03-05-2019 2/2 Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner by contending that there is direct allegation of taking money against the petitioner and her husband as well as two other family members. On perusal of records, it appears that the petitioner had given three cheques, but all the cheques have been dishonoured and only in order to save skin from the allegations, the petitioner has filed a false case vide Annexure-3 stating therein that her husband assaulted her and snatched her pass book as well as cheque books. From the allegations levelled, it appears that the petitioner had played a vital role in the alleged crime. He therefore submits that the petitioner does not deserve to be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of the allegation and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner is rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) shailendra/- U T