Madhu Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80600 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-26 Year-2022 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Madhu Kumari W/O Navin Kumar R/o Madhu Meritage, Vijay Singh Yadav Path, Danapur Khagaul, P.S. Danapur, Dist. patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vinay Ranjan, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Roy, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 14-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with 26 of 2022, registered for the offence punishable under sections 406, 420 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It transpires that earlier the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was allowed vide order dated 01.08.2023 passed in Cr. Miscellaneous No. 11527 of 2023 with a direction to pay the remaining amount of Rs. 20,08,000/- to the informant in installments.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner was arrested in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 394 of 2023 on 28.08.2024 and thereafter remanded in this case on 28.08.2024. However, as per
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80600 of 2024(3) dt.14-02-2025 2/2 condition laid down in order dated 01.08.2024 passed in Cr. Miscellaneous No. 11527 of 2023 out of Rs. 20,88,000/- petitioner has paid Rs. 19,80,000/- to the informant till 22.09.2024 and later on petitioner has paid remaining amount of Rs. 4,08,000/- on 10.02.2025 and thus total amount of Rs. 23,88,000/- has been paid by the petitioner as mentioned in supplementary affidavit of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the State and the informant opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the fact that petitioner has already paid total amount to the informant and also the fact that she is in custody since 28.08.2024 and also charge-sheet has been submitted in this case, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Danapur in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 26 of 2022.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Ranjeet/- U T