Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44367 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-29 Year-2022 Thana- JALALPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

URMILA DEVI Wife of Jugeshwar Rai @ Jugeshwar Prasad Resident of village - Dhup Nagar Pashchim Tola, P.S.- Jalalpur, District - Saran (Chapra).

2.

Jugeshwar Rai @ Jugeshwar Prasad Son of Late Budhan Rai Resident of village - Dhup Nagar Pashchim Tola, P.S.- Jalalpur, District - Saran (Chapra).

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-10-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner no.2.

Permission is accorded.

The petitioner no.1 apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner no.1 is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that the petitioner and her husband took Rs. 13 lakh for treatment and in lieu thereof, agreed to execute sale

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44367 of 2022(2) dt.17-10-2022 2/2 deed with respect to a piece of their land and now they are refusing to execute the sale deed despite notice and are not even returning the money.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that the allegations are vague, it is also submitted that if the petitioner and her husband are not executing the sale deed then the same is a civil dispute for which the informant has remedies available in law.

Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner no.1, in the event of his 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) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Jalalpur P.S. Case No. 29 of 2022 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Shivam/- U T