Allowed

Pratima Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Sept 2022CR. MISC./16877/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted anticipatory bail to two female petitioners accused of kidnapping, cheating, and criminal intimidation. The court relied on inconsistencies in the informant's delayed FIR lodgement and the victim's initial non-cooperation with the prosecution. Bail was to be granted upon surrender to the trial court within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners allowed to be released on anticipatory bail within six weeks upon surrender to trial court with bond and sureties.

Pratima Kumari Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16877 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-466 Year-2021 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui

¶3

======================================================

¶4

1. PRATIMA KUMARI D/o Puran Ravidas Resident of Village - Baruwatta, P.S.- Jamui, Distt.- Jamui.

¶5

Urmila Devi W/o Puran Ravidas Resident of Village - Baruwatta, P.S.Jamui, Distt.- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad Mr. Rabindra Kumar Mr. Bharat Lal Md. Fahiuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 23-09-2022

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

¶13

counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State through virtual Court proceedings.

¶14

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are women and the informant alleges that on 22.10.2021 at about 12 PM Pratima Kumari (petitioner no. 1) came to the

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16877 of 2022(2) dt.23-09-2022 2/4

¶17

informant’s house, who is the friend of informant’s daughter and took his daughter to fill a form but did not return till 7:00 PM, it is next alleged that accordingly the informant went to the house of petitioner no. 1 at 8:00 PM when she disclosed that three named accused and two unidentified accused had kidnapped her, it is next alleged that mother of petitioner no. 1 i.e., petitioner no. 2 was also questioned by the informant when she used abusive language and threatened him that he would face consequences if he did not leave the place thus alleges that petitioner no. 1 and 2 in conspiracy got the occurrence committed.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner no. 1 is a young girl of 19 years of age and is friend of the victim and she has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that the date of occurrence is 22.10.2021 and the FIR came to be instituted on 29.10.2021, it is thus submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that if what has been alleged in the FIR is true then why the informant did not promptly instituted an FIR, after coming to know that the accused persons have kidnapped his daughter, thus it amply demonstrates that the

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16877 of 2022(2) dt.23-09-2022 3/4

¶20

victim eloped with her lover, it is next submitted that the victim has returned and her statement was recorded by the police under Section 161 Cr.P.C., wherein she had disclosed that she was in love with Rajesh Ravidas and they have performed marriage and she was staying with him at Panipat and when she came to know that her father had instituted a case then she came back, it is also submitted that the victim has disclosed her age as 22 years.

¶21

Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for the informant oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners, but are not able to meet the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the victim did not support the prosecution case in her statement made before the police, further the learned counsel for the informant also submits that he does not have instruction that as to whether the victim has supported the case of the prosecution or not.

¶22

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16877 of 2022(2) dt.23-09-2022 4/4

¶24

on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 5,000/(Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 466 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶25

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶26

Shivam/-

¶27

U T

Pratima Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratima Kumari 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

Rohit Pandit @ Rohit Ramdas Pandit Vs The State of Bihar

Vishal Kumar and Anr. Vs The State of Bihar and Anr.

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Laichi Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Jitendra Yadav @ Jitendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ankush Kumar Vs The State of Bihar