Allowed

Shobha Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC4 Oct 2024CR. MISC./62729/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners running ultrasound centres apprehended arrest in a complaint case under the PC & PNDT Act alleging non-compliance with rules and absence of doctors during inspection. Granting bail to similarly situated co-accused, the court allowed anticipatory bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000 each with two like sureties before the Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Arwal, subject to Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. conditions.

Shobha Kumari Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62729 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2023 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

Shobha Kumari W/o- Uday Kumar Chanchal Village- Shahganj PS-Kurtha Dist- Arwal, Proprietor of Maa Manglam Ultrasound Centre Kinjer Karpi

¶5

Dhananjay Kumar son of Ram Bali Prasad @ Ram Bali Ram VillageSikariya Ps- Kurtha Dist- Arwal Proprietor of Patliputra Ultrasound Centre, Kurtha Arwal

¶6

Ranjan Kumar son of Mahendra Singh Village- Bhav Bigha, Gobardhanpur Kanap Ps- Daudnagar Dist- Aurangabad, Proprietor of Patliputra Ultrasound Centre, Kurtha Arwal

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶11

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP ======================================================

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 04-10-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶14

A.P.P. for the State.

¶15

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Govt. Official Complaint Case No. 15 of 2023 registered under Sections 23, 25 and 26 of the Per-conception and PerNatal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act.

¶16

As per prosecution case, all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners, are alleged to be running ultra-sound centres at different places in the district of Arwal without following the rules and regulations of the PC & PNDT

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62729 of 2024(3) dt.04-10-2024 2/3

¶18

Act. It is further alleged that on the date of inspection, no doctors were found at the ultra sound centres.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that the entire exercise done by the Civil Surgeon, Arwal, is patently illegal since as per provisions contained under Section 17 (4) of the PC & PNDT Act, Civil Surgeon is not the competent authority to inspect or conduct enquiry. Moreover, during pendency of the case, the licences of ultra sound centres of these petitioners have already been suspended and petitioners have been directed to submit their show cause. Similarly situated several co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 48303 of 2024. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.

¶20

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the bail application.

¶21

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail, let the above named petitioners be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of eight weeks

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62729 of 2024(3) dt.04-10-2024 3/3

¶23

from today, on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000 (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Arwal in connection with Govt. Official Complaint Case No. 15 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C.

¶24

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)

¶25

utkarsh/-

¶26

U T

Shobha Kumari v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shobha 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

Maya Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar @ Mandal Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Dayanand Prakash Vs the State of Bihar

Rajesh Kushwaha @ Rajesh Kumar Kushwaha Vs The State of Bihar

Vikram Sao @ Vikram Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Manish Prasad @ Divyanshu Vs The State of Bihar through Cabinet Vigilance, Patna