IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1871 of 2020

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-133 Year-2020 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada

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

1.

Ranju Devi, W/o Jitendar Chaudhary, Resident of Postmortam Road, Shiv

Nagar, P.S.- Nawada, District- Nawada

2.

Panchali Devi, W/o Pankaj Kumar, R/o village- Ohari, P.S.- Nawada

(Kadirganj O.P.), District- Nawada

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar

2.

Sudhir Kumar Das, S/o Mauji Das R/O Dhamaul, P.S-Rajouli, Nawada.

... ... Respondent/s

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

Appearance :

For the Appellant/s

:

Mr.Man Mohan Kumar, Advocate

For the O.P. No. 2

:

Mr. Ashok Kumar Sinha, Advocate

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr. APP.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. KUMAR

ORAL ORDER

4

09-04-2021

Heard the parties.

This is an appeal under Section 14(A) (2) of SC & ST

(Prevention of Atrocities Amendment) Act, 2015 against the

refusal of prayer for bail by order dated 19.09.2020 passed

A.B.P. No. 955 of 2020 by learned 1st Additional Sessions

Judge-cum-Special Judge SC/ST Act, Nawada in connection

with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 133 of 2020, registered under

Sections 420, 323, 427, 504, 304, 120(B) of the Indian Penal

Code and Section 3 (ii) (v) of the SC /ST Act.

Allegedly, at the instance of the accused persons, in

spite of being referred by doctor of Sadar Hospital, Nawada to

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1871 of 2020(4) dt.09-04-2021

2/3

M.M.C.H. Gaya, patient was taken to private nursing home, for

better treatment and she where on surgery, the informant’s

Bhabhi gave birth to a child but in course of treatment, his

Bhabhi died.

Learned counsel appearing for the appellants

submitted that though the appellants are named in the first

information report, on perusal of the fardbeyan, it would appear

that they have been dragged by the informant due to death of

patient. From plain reading of the fardbeyan, it would transpire

that the role played by the appellants would not constitute any

criminal offence under the Act. He further contended that the

appellants were not in any way involved in taking the sister-in-

law of the informant to Maa Ahilya Janch Ghar. He also

contended that both the appellants are Asha workers having

roots in the society and are not likely to abscond or tamper with

the evidence. Lastly, he contended that the ingredients of the

non-bailable offences are not at all attracted against the

appellants and the entire allegations made against them in order

to blackmail and extort money from them.

It has been further submitted on behalf of the

appellants that they are innocent and have been falsely

implicated in this case. During investigation nowhere it has

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1871 of 2020(4) dt.09-04-2021

3/3

come that operation was performed by unqualified doctor. No

such complaint was ever received against petitioner in past.

Similarly placed co-accused has been granted bail by co-

ordinate bench of this court vide order dated 17.03.2021 passed

in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 1873 of 2020. The appellants are

lady and have no criminal antecedent.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the

case, the provisional anticipatory bail granted to appellants vide

order dated 17.12.2020 is confirmed.

Rajiv/-

(S. Kumar, J)

U

T