Posted On by &filed under High Court, Patna High Court - Orders.


Patna High Court – Orders
Sarful Nesha &Amp; Anr vs The State Of Bihar on 15 June, 2010
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Cr.Misc. No.20308 of 2010
                       1. SARFUL NESHA WIFE OF GAFFAR MIAN
                        2. SAIMUL NESHA WIFE OF MUSLIM MIAN
                                              Versus
                                  THE STATE OF BIHAR
                                       ------

2. 15.6.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

State.

The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in a case

instituted for the offence under sections 341, 447, 323, 324,

307, 379 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Considering that the petitioners are ladies and there is

no allegation of assault alleged against them, let the petitioners,

above named, in the event of their surrender within four weeks

from today in connection with Bairia P.S.case No.29 of 2010

shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of

Rs. 5,000/- (five thousand) each with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Bettiah, District West Champaran, subject to the conditions as

laid down u/s.438(2) Cr.P.C. and (i) that one of the bailors will

be a close relative of the petitioners, who will give an affidavit

giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioners.

The bailors will undertake to furnish information to the court

about any change in the address of the petitioners, (ii) that the

petitioners shall undertake to be represented on the first date

after cognizance and in case they fail to do so, their bail bond

shall be liable to be cancelled, (iii) that the petitioners will give
-2-

an undertaking that they will receive the police papers on the

given date and be present on the date fixed for charge and if

they fail to do so on two given dates and delays the trial in any

manner, their bail will be liable to be cancelled for reasons of

misuse and (iv) that the petitioners will be well represented on

each date and if they fail to do so on two consecutive dates,

their bail will be liable to be cancelled.

Narendra/                         ( Anjana Prakash, J. )
 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

93 queries in 0.146 seconds.