Shobha Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67765 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2021 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran ====================================================== Shobha Devi W/O Dhuman Das R/O Village- Pakari Dixit Tola, Hanuman Nagar, P.S- Kalyanpur, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Badri Das S/O Late Pajha Das R/O Village- Pakari Dixit Tola, Hanuman Nagar, P.S- Kalyanpur, Distt.- East Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Priyesh Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ramchandra Sahni ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-10-2025 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 363 and 366A of the Indian Penal Code and Section 8 of POCSO Act. 3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter was kidnapped by the accused persons including the petitioner with the help of unknown accused. 4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that no doubt the statement of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67765 of 2025(2) dt.07-10-2025 2/3 victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C, wherein she supported the case of the prosecution, but then her statement was recorded under parental pressure. It is further submitted that the trial against Sonakshi and Rambabu Singh commenced and both of them were acquitted by judgement dated 4-7-2025 in TR No. 113 of 2023 arising out of Kalyanpur PS Case No. 334 of 2021. It is submitted that from perusal of the judgement dated 47-2025, it would manifest that at para-9 it has been recorded that the victim was scolded by her father on account of which she left her house and went to her aunt's place and returned after 1015 days and in her cross examination, she also stated that accused persons had not kidnapped her. It is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove her innocence.
5.
Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67765 of 2025(2) dt.07-10-2025 3/3 amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 334 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. 7.
However, it is made clear that in the event if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that the petitioner after her release is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial, in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T