Savitri Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76265 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-320 Year-2023 Thana- PHULPARAS District- Madhubani ====================================================== Savitri Devi wife of Ganesh Kumar Yadav Village- Inarwa, P.O. -Jageshwarsthan, P.S. -Phulparas, District -Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jitendra Bharti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 18-11-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Dilip Kr. No. 1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. 2.

The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Phulparas P.S. Case No. 320 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 1035 of 2023, registered for the offence punishable u/s 420, 406, 120(B)/34 of IPC.

3.

Allegedly, the petitioner along with one another co-accused persons took the advance of Rs. 14 lakhs and after perusal of measurement book it appeared that they completed the work of Rs. 8,81,223 and have misappropriated the Government money of Rs. 5,18,777/- under the scheme of Mukhyamantri Gramin Pay Jal Scheme.

4.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. She has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possesion of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76265 of 2024(2) dt.18-11-2024 2/2 petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner has completed all the work which is clear from Annexure 2 of the bail application. The allegation leveled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent as mentioned in para 3 of bail application. 5.

Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for grant of anticipatory bail on her behalf is hereby rejected.

7.

This application is accordingly dismissed.

8.

However, the petitioner is at liberty to surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks and seek regular bail and the learned Court below would pass order, preferably, on the same day, in accordance with law considering the fact that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and she has completed her work.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) priyanka/- U T