Ranju Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63671 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2019 Thana- BASOPATTI DistrictMadhubani ====================================================== RANJU KUMARI W/o Shambhu Kumar Thakur Resident of Village - Damu, P.S.- Basopatti, Distt.- Madhubani. At Present In-Charge Principal, Primary School EJOT KANYA, Gram Panchayat Damu, P.S.- Basopatti, Distt.- Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Mishra, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party:

Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 23-10-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 467, 468, 471, 472, 420, 409, 406 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case No. 171 of 2019.

3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated on the accusation of having tampered the records for securing appointment of her husband Shambhu Kumar Thakur as Panchayat Teacher by the petitioner as In-charge Headmaster of Ejot Kanya Primary School and consequently illegal payment of salary to him. It is submitted however that the petitioner has no role to play in the appointment of her husband as Panchayat Teacher which is the responsibility of the Mukhiya and Panchayat Secretary under the 2006 Rules. Moreover, the petitioner's husband Shambhu Kumar Thakur had already been appointed as Panchayat Teacher in the year 2007 (Annexure-2) well before the petitioner's own appointment as In-charge Headmaster in the year 2012 (Annexure-3). The District Programme Officer by his

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63671 of 2019(2) dt.23-10-2019 2/2 letter dated 10.02.2018 has found that withholding of salary of the petitioner's husband despite discharge of duties by him was not proper or justified. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.

4. Be that as it may, in the event of the petitioner's arrest or surrender before the court below within six weeks from the date of communication of this order, let the above named petitioner 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate5th, Madhubani in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case No. 171 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438

(2) Cr.P.C., and also subject to the following further 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 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. (iv) That the petitioner shall be well represented in Court on each and every date during trial except as and when directed by the learned Court below to be physically present, 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.

(Vikash Jain, J) Ibrar//- U T