Sulekha Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77291 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2019 Thana- JEHANABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.

SULEKHA DEVI Wife of Sanjay Singh @ Chintu Resident of VillageManjhos, P.S.- Makhdumpur, Distt-Jehanabad. 2.

Sanjay Singh @ Chintu Son of Ganauri @ Ram Pravesh Singh Resident of Village- Ratu Bigha, P.S.- Ghosi, District- Jehanabad. 3.

Pintu Kumar @ Mangal Son of Late Nandlal Prasad Resident of VillageRatu Bigha, P.S.- Ghosi, District- Jehanabad. 4.

Mina Devi W/o Late Nandlal Prasad Resident of Village- Ratu Bigha, P.S.- Ghosi, District- Jehanabad.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Neelam Kumari, w/o Satyaranjan Kr. Verma, r/o Moh-S.P. Verma road, Tehta, PS-Makhdumpur, Dist-Jehanabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Paras Nath For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 16-03-2020 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with complaint case no. 265 of 2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 452, 504, 380 of Indian Penal Code.

The allegation is regarding the accused persons having arrived at the house of the complainant while she was with her husband and had thereafter, called her as a witch and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77291 of 2019(3) dt.16-03-2020 2/3 assaulted her with fists and fats. It is further alleged that the petitioners no. 2 and 3 had tried to outrage the modesty of the complainant.

The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and as far as petitioners no. 3 and 4 are concerned, they are having clean antecedent but the petitioners no. 1 and 2 are accused in one case each, however they are on bail in the said case. It is further submitted that the present case arises out of case and counter case, the case filed by the petitioner no.1 being first in time. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no injury report on record to substantiate the factum of the petitioners having assaulted the complainant or her husband, hence the entire story is imaginary and cooked up.

The learned counsel appearing for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as also taking into account the fact that there is no injury report on record and the present case arises out of case and counter case, I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioners to the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77291 of 2019(3) dt.16-03-2020 3/3 abovenamed petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Jehanabad in connection with Complaint case no. 265 of 2019 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T