Petitioner, an old lady facing trial for cheating and criminal breach of trust, filed a miscellaneous application. While rejecting interference with the lower court's order, the Court ordered the lower judiciary to consider bail if she surrendered within six weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.53449 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -3513 Year- 2010 Thana -PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
PATNA
====================================================== Shanti Devi Wife of Dhurpat Thakur, Resident of Village - Pinjour, Police Station - Paras Bigha, District -Jehanabad.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
.... .... Opposite Party/s
====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhuri Lata For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kalyan Shankar (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER
02/ 02-05-2017 Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.N. Thakur, learned counsel for the State.
The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 18.08.2015 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna, whereby the petitioner’s application for exemption from personal appearance under Section 205 Cr.P.C. in Complaint Case No. 3513(C) of 2010 has been rejected.
The prosecution case is that rupees two lakhs
cash and rupees one lakh through cheque were taken by the petitioner and her husband by impersonating one Musafir Thakur for executing a sale deed with regard to a land but neither the sale
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53449 of 2015 (2) dt.02-05-2017
2/3
deed was executed nor the money was returned.
The learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna after considering the S.A. of the complainant and statement of enquiry witnesses vide order dated 12.05.2011 directed for issuance of process after cognizance being taken under Sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the cheque was never encashed and the petitioner disputes her LTI on the agreement and the receiving and a case has also been lodged by the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner is an old lady suffering from various old age ailments.
From the material on record, it appears that the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was twice disposed of with liberty to surrender. Thereafter, the prayer for quashing of the complaint case vide Cr. Misc. No. 45375 of 2012 was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 07.08.2014 passed by a Bench of this Court and above all now the process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been issued.
Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere. But keeping in view of the fact that only, prima facie, case under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of the IPC has been found by the learned Magistrate and petitioner is an old lady, this Court sees no
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.53449 of 2015 (2) dt.02-05-2017
3/3
reason for the learned Magistrate not to consider the prayer for bail of the petitioner, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today. It is expected from the learned court below to dispose of the bail application of the petitioner preferably on the same day.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of.
(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)
DKS/-
U T
1 issue framed by the court
Whether cr. misc. application for quashing rejection of Section 205 Cr.P.C. exemption should be allowed in light of petitioner's age.
Shanti Devi
The State of Bihar
Raghvendru Kr. Singh
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
