Geeta Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71220 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2024 Thana- AMARPUR District- Banka ====================================================== Geeta devi Wife of Tanik Lal Goswami Resident of Village- Moulanachak, P.S.- Amarpur, Distt.- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 21-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 397 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

Prosecution case in short is that while the informant along with her sister-in-law were going for harvesting crops, informant was assaulted by means of iron rod by one Raja Goswami. It is also alleged that co-accused, namely, Taniklal Goswami took out Rs. 1000/- from the pocket of the husband of the informant.

4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71220 of 2024(2) dt.21-10-2024 2/3 that the petitioner is in custody since 10-08-2024. Petitioner is stated to be woman of clean antecedent.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that there is no specific allegation of Section 307 of the IPC against the petitioner, rather there is allegation of snatching gold chain of the informant. Specific allegation of assault is against co-accused, namely, Raja Goswami. Learned counsel submits that present case is the counter blast of the earlier Complaint Case No. 1078 of 2024 filed by the petitioner's side. It is submitted that there is subsisting land dispute between the parties and parties are agnates.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner and clean antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71220 of 2024(2) dt.21-10-2024 3/3 Court below/concerned Court in connection with Amarpur P.S. Case No. 397 of 2024.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T