Sangita Devi @ Sangeeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21407 of 2018 (3) dt.26-04-2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21407 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -158 Year- 2016 Thana -AURAI District- MUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Sangita Devi @ Sangeeta Devi, Wife of Pramod Ray, resident of Panapur Tola Ariya, P.S.- Aurai, District- Muzaffarpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner : Mr. Baleshwar Kamat, Advocate. For the Opposite Party : APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 26-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody since 31.08.2017 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 818 of 2017 arising out of Aurai P.S. Case No. 158 of 2016 for the offences alleged under Sections 363, 366(A) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated and there is no material to connect the petitioner with the alleged occurrence. There is inordinate delay in instituting the F.I.R. on 04.11.2016 for the alleged occurrence of 27.10.2016 without any explanation for such delay. The petitioner is a poor lady working as labourer in the fields and does not own a Mobile phone and the question of her making calls to the informant or to the victim girl does not arise. There is no material in the investigation to connect the petitioner with the Mobile phone from which such calls were made. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, having regard to the entirety of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21407 of 2018 (3) dt.26-04-2018 the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 818 of 2017 arising out of Aurai P.S. Case No. 158 of 2016, on the following conditions:- (i) That one of the bailors shall be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) That the petitioner shall not indulge in any similar offence till conclusion of the trial. (iii) That the petitioner will be well represented in court on each and every date during trial and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be liable to be cancelled by the learned Court concerned. (iv) The petitioner shall cooperate with the investigation, if not already concluded, and make herself available as and when so required and in case of failure, the State shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(Vikash Jain, J) Md. Ibrarul/BT U T