Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Pal @ Sarita Kumari Pal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75367 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1263 Year-2021 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.
Sarita Kumari @ Sarita Pal @ Sarita Kumari Pal W/o Akhilesh Pal @ Akhilesh Kumar R/o vill - Sakrauli, P.s- Patepur, Distt. - Vaishali 2.
Sonapati Devi W/o Binod Mandal R/o vill - Ajijpur Chande, P.S. - Patepur, Distt. - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sweta Sinha W/o Raj Ranjan Raju R/o vill - Chandpura, Baligaon, P.S. - Baligaon, Distt. - Vaishali ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Priyesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 384, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The present case arises out of a complaint filed by the complainant wherein she levelled an allegation that the accused persons, in connivance with some anti-social elements came and demanded extortion of Rs. 50,000/- It has specifically been alleged against one Akhilesh Pal that he, on the point of pistol, compelled the complainant's husband to sign on blank paper and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75367 of 2024(3) dt.16-04-2025 2/3 it is alleged with regard to these petitioners that they had also assisted him in the said offence by taking his signature forcibly.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegations levelled in the complaint petition against the petitioners are absolutely false and as a matter of fact, the husband of the complainant was in urgent need of money to establish his clinic and for providing admission in A.N.M. to the daughter of petitioner no.2, he had taken loan of Rs. 2,50,000/- from the petitioners and the husband of petitioner no.1. A punchnama was also prepared in the presence of witnesses on 08.07.2021 in this regard and the husband of the complainant had been handed over the said amount. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the occurrence is said to have taken place on 08.07.2021, whereas the present complaint came to be filed after a delay of almost 19 days on 27.07.2021.
Learned counsel for the petitioners also invites the attention of this Court to a supplementary affidavit filed by him whereby he has brought on record a complaint case, i.e., Complaint Case No. 2581/2021 filed by petitioner no.1 against the complainant and others to show that there was case and counter case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75367 of 2024(3) dt.16-04-2025 3/3 Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 78629 of
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the facts that both the petitioners are ladies, who have not been attributed any major role in the offence and further that the main accused of the case, namely, Akhilesh Pal, has been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 02.12.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 78629 of 2024, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners having clean antecedent. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Complaint Case No. C11263 of 2021, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C/ 482 (2) of the BNSS, 2023. (Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T