Allowed

Ranjana Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC27 Mar 2017CR. MISC./7127/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Patna enlarged the petitioner, wife of Vikash Kumar, on bail in connection with offences under various sections of the IPC, Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, and POCSO, subject to conditions regarding her cooperation with the trial.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is enlarged on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, cooperating with the investigation and trial.

Ranjana Devi Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.7127 of 2017

¶2

Arising Out of PS.Case No. -127 Year- 2016 Thana -TAJPUR District- SAMASTIPUR

¶3

====================================================== Ranjana Devi, W/o Fuleshwar Paswan, resident of Madhopur, P.S.Bibhutipur, District-Samastipur.

¶4

.... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ajay Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶5

4 27-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶6

Petitioner is languishing in custody for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 365 and 366A/34 of the Indian Penal Code which was converted into Sections 372, 376, 406, 420, 467, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 4, 5, 6(A), 7 and 9 of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act as well as Sections 6 & 7 of the POCSO Act.

¶7

According to FIR, co-accused Vikash Kumar is suspected to have induced two daughters of the informant to go with him on the pretext of providing them job. The victim girl Ankita Kumari in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. alleged that Vikash Kumar was pressurizing for marriage and he

¶8

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7127 of 2017 (4) dt.27-03-2017

¶9

¶10

established physical relation with her. Both the girls have already been recovered. There is no allegation against the petitioner, who is wife of Vikash Kumar.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid facts as well as the fact that two more co-accused Ranjit Kumar Yadav @ Ranjit Yadav and Manish Kumar have already been allowed bail by different co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 11.08.2016 and 20.10.2016 passed in Cr.Misc.No.31147 of 2016 and 35165 of 2016 respectively, let the petitioner, above named, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-1^st , Samastipur/Successor Court, in connection with Tajpur (Halai O.P.) P.S. Case No.127 of 2016, with condition that petitioner shall fully cooperate with the investigation and trial of the case, failing which the Court-below shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail-bonds of the petitioner in this case.

¶12

Arvind/-

¶13

(Birendra Kumar, J)

¶14

U T

Ranjana Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjana Devi v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Alok Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar

Umesh Sharma Vs The State Of Bihar

Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Shekhar Vs The State Of Bihar

Rinku Devi Vs The State Of Bihar

Niranjan Yadav @ Niro Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar