Shabnam Kumari v. The Sate Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32394 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2018 Thana- KHARHAGPUR District- Munger ====================================================== SHABNAM KUMARI Daughter of Late Ram Gulam Prasad Singh Resident of Village-Shobhandih,P.S.-Kharagpur, District-Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
THE SATE OF BIHAR 2.
Brajesh Kumar Son of Ram Kumar Mahto Resident of Khomouli P.S.- Birpur, District-Begusarai.
... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Arvind Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Pancha Nand Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2019 Heard the parties.
This application, under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed on behalf of the petitioner to cancel the bail bond of the opposite party no.2, as furnished by him in the light of the order dated 08.10.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. No.62411 of 2018 by this Court, whereby and whereunder the opposite party no.2 was directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Munger, in connection with Kharagpur P.S. Case No.62 of 2018, with the further condition that out of two sureties, one surety
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32394 of 2019(4) dt.18-09-2019 2/2 must be his close relative.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the time of disposal of Criminal Misc. No.62411 of 2018, wrong submission was made on behalf of the opposite party no.2 that the opposite party no.2 and the petitioner have already performed the marriage at the Hanuman Temple, Patna, but no document was filed in that regard. Further submission on behalf of the petitioner is that after releasing on bail, the opposite party no.2 uploaded the photograph of the petitioner in Whats-up. No any other submission has been made on behalf of the petitioner that the opposite party no.2 misused the privilege of bail and, as such, I find no reason to cancel the bail bond of the opposite party no.2, as furnished by him in the light of the order dated 08.10.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. No.62411 of 2018 by this Court.
Accordingly, this application stands dismissed. (Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T