Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.65116 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2018 Thana- KANTI THARMAL POWER DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== Sunita Devi Wife of Vishnu Rai Resident of Village- Sadatpur, P.S. Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pravin Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sri S.M. Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-12-2018 Heard learned counsels for the parties.
The petitioner is apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 365 of the IPC.
The prosecution case as perh the written report of Ranjit Rai submitted to the SHO, Kanti, Muzaffarpur is to the effect that on 2.3.2018 at 11.30 P.M., the son of the informant namely, Pankaj Kumar aged about 16 years went out of the house without informing anybody in the house. He was carrying mobile with two numbers which were found switched off. It is further alleged that despite intensive search being made, the son of the informant could not be found. In course of investigation, it transpired that the victim had some proximity with the daughter of the petitioner and the husband of the petitioner called one Mangal Rai who has been apprehended in this case and the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.65116 of 2018(2) dt.13-12-2018 2/3 mobile of the petitioner's husband was used in making calls to said Mangal Rai.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the only on the basis of suspicion, the petitioner has been falsely roped in the present case. It is further submitted that whatever materials have been collected during investigation contradicts the prosecution version but these facts have been suppressed while lodging the FIR which has been lodged on second day of the actual occurrence.
Learned counsel for the informant submits that during investigation, it transpired that the victim boy was made to disappear since he had proximity with the daughter of the petitioner.
Considering the suspicious nature of accusation and the petitioner being a lady coupled with the statement made in paragraph 3 of the petition that the petitioner is are not having any criminal antecedent, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail in the event of arrest or surrender within 12 weeks on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.65116 of 2018(2) dt.13-12-2018 3/3 SDJM, West, Muzaffarpur in connection with Kaanti P.S. Case No.98 of 2018 subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) anil/- U