Sudha Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11986 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1081 Year-2025 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Sudha Devi Wife of Pappu Singh @ Amarjit Kumar Singh @ Amarjit Kumar Resident of village - Karihon, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali at Hajipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhinav Shandilya, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Md. Fahimuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 137(2) and 96 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. As per the prosecution case, informant, Badal Kumar raised suspicion that some persons, whose mobile numbers were blocked by the informant's sister, kidnapped his minor sister with bad intention. He also suspected about the murder of his sister.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Further submission is that there was love affairs of the victim with one Rohit Kumar, and petitioner, being the mami of Rohit Kumar,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11986 of 2026(2) dt.25-02-2026 2/2 has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of suspicion. She has no concern with the affairs of said Rohit Kumar and the victim girl. There is an inordinate delay of eight days in lodging the F.I.R. The charge-sheet has already been submitted after completion of investigation. Petitioner is in custody since 10.12.2025 having no criminal antecedent and she undertakes to co-operate in the trial. There is no chance of tampering with the evidence or absconding of the petitioner.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail application of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that charge-sheet has been submitted, delay in filing the F.I.R., clean antecedent of the petitioner and period of custody undergone, let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Vaishali at Hajipur/concerned Court in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 1081 of 2025. (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) utkarsh/- U T