Sunaina Devi @ Sunaina Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82286 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2023 Thana- KINJAR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Sunaina Devi @ Sunaina Kumari Wife of Dhananjay Kumar Resident of Village- Baddopur (Baddo), P.S.- Kinjar, District- Arwal ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-12-2024 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Kinjar P.S. Case No. 164 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406/ 420/ 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is of duping the innocent persons on the pretext of providing job and thereby received Rs.50,000/- from each of the aspirants, who are total 68-70 in numbers.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner drawing the attention of this Court to the FIR, contended that the petitioner had been working as a Secretary of Job Training Centre and she was not even acquainted with the mode and manner for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82286 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 2/3 providing the job which was being run by Chairman, namely, Jaiprakash Kumar. It is further contended that the petitioner has never accepted any amount from any of the aspirants rather it is the Chairman, who has accepted the amount. Be that as it may, now the matter has been compromised between the petitioner and the informant along with other aspirants, who have put there signatures in the compromise petition, the copy of which has been marked as Annexure P/2. It is lastly contended that the petitioner is a lady having fair antecedent and she undertakes that she will fully co-operate in the proceeding of the Court.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the matter has already been resolved between the parties coupled with the fair antecedent and the petitioner is a lady, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Arwal in connection with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82286 of 2024(2) dt.11-12-2024 3/3 Kinjar P.S. Case No. 164 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.

(Harish Kumar, J) Harshita/- U T