Sangita Devi @ Munni Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48579 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-57 Year-2024 Thana- LODIPUR District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== 1.

Sangita Devi @ Munni Devi Wife Of Ram Prakash Singh Village- Jamsi, Ps- Lodipur, Dist- Bhagalpur 2.

Simmi Kumari Daughter Of Ram Prakash Singh Village- Jamsi, Ps- Lodipur, Dist- Bhagalpur 3.

Ram Prakash Singh Son Of Virendra Kumar Singh Village- Jamsi, PsLodipur, Dist- Bhagalpur 4.

Hrithik Raj @ Hrithik Singh Son Of Ram Prakash Singh Village- Jamsi, PsLodipur, Dist- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 366/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, these petitioners are alleged to have kidnapped the widowed sister of informant and forcibly got her married with someone else in order to grab her property.

4. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are sisters-in-law, petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48579 of 2024(3) dt.23-09-2024 2/3 No. 3 is brother-in-law and petitioner No. 4 is nephew of the victim.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, husband of informant, namely, Ankit Singh died in an accident in Surat, Gujarat and victim got compensation amount of Rs. 10 lacs. After receiving the compensation amount, victim on her own sweet will re-married with one Shubham Singh in the district of Jaunpur, U.P. and no one forced her to do so. After remarrying, when victim realized that now she is not entitled to the share of property of her first husband, then this false and concocted case has been lodged against petitioners with an ulterior motive. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

6. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed the bail application.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48579 of 2024(3) dt.23-09-2024 3/3 Bhagalpur in connection with Lodipur P. S. Case No. 57 of 2024, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T