Mina Devi @ Meena Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1939 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-469 Year-2024 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Mina Devi @ Meena Kumari W/O Late Basudev Sharma @ Vasu Deo Sharma @ Basu Deo Sharma R/o Mohalla - Marshal Bazar, Near Petrol Pump, P.s.- Danapur, Distt.- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in Danapur P. S. Case No. 469 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 506, 420/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is alleged that even after receiving the advance amount of Rs. 12,28,000/-, this petitioner neither executed the sale deed in favour of the informant nor returned the advance amount.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of fact, present false and concocted case has been lodged with a view to grab the residential house of the petitioner. Petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1939 of 2026(5) dt.23-06-2026 2/2 claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that from perusal of the impugned order, it is apparent that there is an admission of receiving the money in question and during course of argument in Trial Court, learned counsel for the petitioner agreed to return the entire advance money to the informant in installments and took several adjournments on this ground, but lastly, refused to return the advance amount.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and conduct of the petitioner, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T