Babita Devi @ Babita Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9682 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-36 Year-2025 Thana- DEODHA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Babita Devi @ Babita Kumari, W/O Late Arjun Mahto @ Arjun Kumar, R/o Vill.- Gangaur, P.S.- Harlakhi, Distt.- Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Dewdha P.S. Case No. 36 of 2025, G.R. No.917 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 137(2), 87 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is that she happens to be the mother of one Ashutosh Kumar, who has eloped with the daughter of the informant and the petitioner had abused the informant and did not disclose the whereabouts of her son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from a bare reading of the FIR, it would be evident that there is no allegation against the petitioner rather the allegation is primarily about enticing away the daughter of the informant by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9682 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 2/3 Ashutosh Kumar, who happens to be the son of the petitioner. It has further been submitted that no offence as alleged in the FIR is made out against the petitioner and the victim was subsequently recovered and in her statement before the police, she has admitted that she had gone out, of her own sweet will, along with the petitioner's son and they had also solemnized marriage in a temple. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Dewdha P.S. Case No. 36 of 2025, G.R. No.917 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9682 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026 3/3 relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the abovementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T