Simran Kumari @ Simran Raj @ Suman Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.65838 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-85 Year-2022 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Simran Kumari @ Simran Raj @ Suman Kumari D/O Baskit Ray R/O Village- Birara, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, Distt.- Vaishali 2.

Radhika Devi Wife Of Baskit Ray R/O Village- Birara, P.S.- Hajipur Sadar, Distt.- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Piyush Saurav, Advocate Mr. Ankur Prakash Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-02-2023 Let the defects, if any, pointed out by the office be removed within three weeks from the date of this order, failing which the matter be listed again under the appropriate heading for necessary action.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Petitioners seek regular bail in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 85 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the prosecution, the informant alleged that these petitioners impersonated themselves to be the informant's

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65838 of 2022(2) dt.28-02-2023 2/3 relative in order to grab the property of the informant under conspiracy.

The main submissions advanced by petitioners' counsel are that both the petitioners are women and in the instant matter the main dispute is in respect of adoption of petitioner No. 1 who happens to be the daughter of informant's brother-in-law and the allegation of forging and fabricating the certificates in question are totally false and baseless and the petitioner No. 2 is wife of the informant and both the petitioners have been languishing in jail since 13.03.2022. Further submission is that the informant and the petitioner No. 2 made oral adoption of petitioner No. 1 in the year 1998, since then petitioner No. 1 had been residing with them and from several documents such as Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Election Identity Card, School Marks Sheet etc. it is clearly manifest that petitioner No. 1 is the adopted daughter of the informant.

Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the aforesaid facts and mainly the nature of allegation appearing from the FIR which is based on the complaint and both the petitioners are women and dispute with regard to alleged adoption is stated to be the genesis of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.65838 of 2022(2) dt.28-02-2023 3/3 occurrence, in my view it is a fit case for bail to both the petitioners. Accordingly, let both the petitioners named-above be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 85 of 2022.

(Shailendra Singh, J.) maynaz/- U T