Patna High CourtCR. MISC./9770/2026dismissed

Lilawati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-16Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9770 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2025 Thana- MAIRWAN District- Siwan ====================================================== Lilawati Devi W/o- Rishideo Kushwaha Resident Of Shiswa Khurd, PsMairwa, Dist- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Mairwa P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 84, 143(2) of the B.N.S. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 16.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43803 of 2025 which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Mairwa P.S. Case No. 67 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 84 and 143(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. The petitioner is the main accused of the case. She has enticed the victim and took her away to Uttar Pradesh where she along with the other co-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9770 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026 2/2 accused i.e., Munna Patel and others got her married to one Lavkesh. It is a case of trafficking of woman.

4. This application is dismissed in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pinki vs. State of U.P. & Anr. reported as 2025 INSC 482 = 2025 SCC OnLine SC 781.

5. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within six months.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial is progressing and only one out of seven witnesses have been examined.

4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T