Jagriti Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30726 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2020 Thana- KOTWALI District- Munger ====================================================== Jagriti Devi, aged about 30 years, female, wife of Shambhu Thakur, Resident of Village/town - Mangal Bazar, P.S. - Kotwali, Basudevpur, Dist. - Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Deep Nishi, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Kumar Virendra Narayan, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Gautam, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 30-01-2021 Heard Mr. Yogesh Chandra Verma, learned counsel along with Mr. Deep Nishi, learned counsel for the petitioner; Mr. Kumar Virendra Narayan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor (hereinafter referred to as the 'APP') for the State and Mr. Ajay Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Kotwali PS Case No.95 of 2020 dated 13.03.2020 instituted under Sections 341, 326-A, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that she, along with others, was party to throwing acid on the granddaughter of the informant.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30726 of 2020 dt.30-01-2021 2/3 she is a lady and the informant is only a hearsay witness, which she admits in the FIR itself. It was submitted that the victim girl in the hospital has given statement to the police that her uncle and co-accused Satish was the person, who threw acid on her and the allegations against the petitioners and others is very general and omnibus of abusing and assaulting the daughter of the informant i.e., the mother of the victim girl. Learned counsel submitted that there is no medical report with regard to any injury on the daughter of the informant.

5. Learned APP submitted that the petitioner was also one of the persons who was there when acid was thrown and she cannot be said to be innocent.

6. Learned counsel for the informant submitted that as per the FIR, the allegation is that she was also involved. It was submitted that even otherwise, the petitioner did assault and abuse the daughter of the informant. However, he did not controvert the fact that there is no injury report to support the allegation that she was assaulted.

7. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today, the petitioner be released on bail upon

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30726 of 2020 dt.30-01-2021 3/3 furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the CJM, Munger, in Kotwali PS Case No.95 of 2020, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and further (i) that one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner, (ii) that the petitioner and the bailors shall execute bond with regard to good behaviour of the petitioner. Any violation of the terms and conditions of the bonds shall lead to cancellation of her bail bonds.

8. The application stands disposed off in the aforementioned terms.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J) J. Alam/- AFR/NAFR U T