Rupam Devi And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.41154 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -315 Year- 2018 Thana -SAHARSA District- SAHARSA ======================================================

1. Rupam Devi, wife of Mukesh Thakur.

2. Pankaj Kumar Sah, son of Kailash Sah, both resident of villageSulindabad, P.S. + District- Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 2/ 13-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No.315 of 2018 instituted for the offence under Section(s) 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 504, 506/34 Indian Penal Code.

It is submitted that in the written report there is specific allegation against Mukesh Thakur of committing fraud with the informant by executing a sale deed in his favour after taking consideration money of Rs.7,25,000/- for the land, which was already sold to Mani Devi wife of Santosh Chaurasia. Petitioner No.1 is wife of Mukesh Thakur and petitioner No.2 has no concern with the aforesaid land deal. In the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.41154 of 2018 (2) dt.13-07-2018 2/2 the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners, named above, within six weeks from today in connection with Saharsa Sadar P.S. Case No.315 of 2018, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr. P. C. with further conditions:

(1) bailors should be local having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the court concerned, (2) petitioners shall cooperate in the trial and shall be present on each and every date fixed by the court and their absence on two consecutive dates without proper and reasonable reason will be liable to cancel their bail bonds and (3) if petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses of the case, in that case, prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail of the petitioners. (Sanjay Priya, J) JA/- U T