Sabita Kumari @ Kajal Priya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67661 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-308 Year-2018 Thana- BAJPATTI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== SABITA KUMARI @ KAJAL PRIYA D/o Late Lochan Ptasad @ Ram Lochan Srivastava R/o village- Humayunpur, P.S.- Bajpatti, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-08-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman.

4. The informant alleges that the name of the petitioner is Sabita Kumari but she by manipulating her Aadhaar Card she executed sale deeds with respect to the property in between 15.05.2018 to 08.06.2018 by disclosing her name as Kajal Priya. It is further submitted that the petitioner fraudulently executed the sale deeds by disclosing herself as Kajal Priya when she is Sabita Kumari.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the informant is Pattidar of the petitioner and it is not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67661 of 2021(4) dt.08-08-2023 2/2 the case of the informant that the petitioner sold his land or land in excess of her share. It is next submitted that since the allegation is that petitioner is not Kajal Priya and is Sabita Kumari that cannot be adjudicated in a criminal trial. It is also submitted that even mother of the petitioner is supporting the case of the petitioner that she has younger daughter by name of Sabita Kumari.

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

7. Considering the nature of dispute, the petitioner abovenamed, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Bajpatti P.S. Case No. 308 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T