Renu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.59979 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1333 Year-2020 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.
Renu Kumari Wife Of Shri Jeevanand Jha R/O Flat No. 103, Universal Classic 1, R. K. Puram, Lane No. 15, Arya Samaj Mandir Road, Near R. P. S. More, P.S- Danapur, District- Patna 2.
Jeevanand Jha Son Of Late Vedanand R/O Flat No. 103, Universal Classic 1, R. K. Puram, Lane No. 15, Arya Samaj Mandir Road, Near R. P. S. More, P.S- Danapur, District- Patna 3.
Pranav Kumar Jha Son Of Jeevanand Jha R/O Flat No. 103, Universal Classic 1, R. K. Puram, Lane No. 15, Arya Samaj Mandir Road, Near R. P. S. More, P.S- Danapur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sunil Kumar Jha S/o Of Sri Kuesheshwar Jha R/O Village- Kapsiya, Ward No.- 13, P.S- Nagar, District- Begusarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Anita Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 21-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 504 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the complainant alleges that petitioners took the jewelry from him which he had kept for giving to his daughter-in-law.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59979 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 2/3 Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner no.1 is own sister of complainant, petitioner no.2 is maternal nephew of complainant and petitioner no.3 is brother-in-law of the complainant and the complainant has tried to falsely implicate them by making such a bald allegation, it is also submitted that the petitioners have receipt of the jewelry and against the jewelry they had also taken loan from HDFC Bank, further the complainant also does not disclose the date and time of the occurrence. Learned counsel further submits that since petitioner no.
1 supports her father which was not liked by the complainant as such the present false complaint case came to be instituted, it is next submitted that had an FIR been instituted perhaps the police would have investigated the case and if the case would have been found false, proper legal action would have been taken against the complainant, perhaps for that reason, a complaint came to be instituted.
Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.59979 of 2022(2) dt.21-11-2022 3/3 event of their 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) each 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 Complaint Case No. 1333C of 2020 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T