Saraswati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77457 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2018 Thana- DAWATH District- Rohtas ====================================================== SARASWATI DEVI Wife of Heeralal Ram Resident of Village-Dharkandha, P.S-Dawath, District-Rohtas.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sada Nand Roy For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Zainul Abedin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-12-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in connection with POCSO Case No. 29 of 2019 arising out of Dawath P.S. Case No. 181 of 2018 registered for the offence punishable under Section 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of POCSO Act.

Informant has alleged in her written complaint that on 10.12.2018 at about 9:00 AM co-accused Jawala Ram forcibly took daughter of informant on his motorcycle and fled away. Allegation against petitioner is that she connived and help the accused in forcibly taking away the victim on his motorcycle and thereafter he also forcibly married her.

It has been submitted on behalf of petitioner that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77457 of 2019(3) dt.13-12-2019 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case and she has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner is in custody since 01.07.2019.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner named above be released on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned court below, in connection with POCSO Case No. 29 of 2019 arising out of Dawath P.S. Case No. 181 of 2018 subject to the conditions that:-

(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 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and his absence on two consecutive dates without proper and sufficient reason the trial court will be at liberty to cancel his bail bond.

(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) veena/- U T