Manju Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20181 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -131 Year- 2017 Thana -AMAS District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Manju Kumari, Daughter of Laldhari Paswan, Resident of VillageHamzapur, P.S.- Amas, District- Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Brajendra Nath Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-07-2018 This case has been listed today under the heading "To Be Mentioned" at the instance of learned counsel for the petitioner.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order 12.04.2018 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20181 of 2018 but the order has still not been communicated to the court below and hence he could not surrender and could not furnish the bail bonds.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

It appears that the petitioner has been granted bail by the order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20181 of 2018 but from the perusal of records, it appears that the name of the petitioner has wrongly been mentioned as Meghan Paswan @ Meghan Pasman, whereas, it should have been Manju Kumari and the Cr. Misc.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20181 of 2018 (6) dt.19-07-2018 2/3 Number has also inadvertently been mentioned as 20167 of 2018, whereas, it should have been Cr. Misc. No. 20181 of 2018. In view of the above let order passed on 12.04.2018 in Cr. Misc. No. 20181 of 2018 be read as follows:- "Heard the parties.

The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in connection with Amas P.S. Case No. 131 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code.

The allegation against the petitioner is that the appointment letter of the petitioner, which was issued by the Joint signature of panchayat Secretary and Mukhiya, was forged. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was posted since 2006 and she is ready to cooperate in the investigation.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail.

Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances as discussed above, let the petitioner, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from today, and on surrender, she will be released on provisional bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20181 of 2018 (6) dt.19-07-2018 3/3 1st Class, Sherghaty (Gaya) in connection with Amas P.S. Case No.131 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. and one of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court. However, it is made clear that once charge sheet is submitted against her, she will have to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit on the basis of material available at that time. This application is accordingly disposed of." Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court below.

Further two weeks' time from the date of receipt of this order, is granted to the petitioner to surrender before the court below for furnishing bail bonds.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T