Kusum Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.52056 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2018 Thana -MUNGER MUFFASIL District- MUNGER ====================================================== Kusum Devi W/o Umesh Yadav, R/o Mai Taufir, P.S.- Moffassil, DistrictMunger. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 05-10-2018 Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in Mufassil P.S. Case No. 45/2018, registered for the offences punishable under Section 366A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Informant alleged that his daughter went to see Sitakund Mela, but did not return. During search, people disclosed that his daughter was seen with Sintu Kumar. Informant went to the house of Sintu Kumar and enquired about his girl, but they denied. Thereafter, informant entered into the house and saw that his girl was confined in a room.

It has been submitted that petitioner is mother of Sintu Kumar. The occurrence is of 01.02.2018, but the F.I.R. was lodged

on 04.02.2018. There is delay of three days, but informant did not give any plausible reason for such delay. Petitioner has falsely been implicated as she is mother of Sintu Kumar. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. She is in custody since 02.07.2018.

Considering the facts aforesaid, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 45/2018, subject to the conditions:

(1.) Bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.

(2.) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and her absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be sufficient to cancel her bail bonds.

(3.) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case,

prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioner.

(S. Kumar, J) Vinita/- U T