Soni Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14862 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-911 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Soni Devi W/o Kundan Saw and D/o- Bhagwan Saw Resident of VillageNauranga, P.S.- Muffasil, Distict- Gayajee 2.
Babita Devi Wife of Bhagwan Saw Resident of Village- Nauranga, P.S.- Muffasil, Distict- Gayajee 3.
Suraj Saw @ Suraj Kumar Son of Bhagwan Saw Resident of VillageNauranga, P.S.- Muffasil, Distict- Gayajee 4.
Meena Devi @ Meena Kumari Wife of Suraj Saw @ Suraj Kumar and D/oRaj Kumar Saw Resident of Village- Nauranga, P.S.- Muffasil, DistictGayajee and Maika Panchu Talab, Hisua, P.S.- Hisua, District- Nawada ... ... Petitioners
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Anjali Kumari Wife of Santosh Saw and D/o Jugal Saw Resident of VillageNauranga Pokhar Par, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Gayajee. And at present resides at Village- Mohan Nagar Koiyli Pokher, P.S.- not given, District- not given ... ... Opposite Parties ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate Ms. Swati Parmar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Gaya Muffasil P.S. Case No. 911 of 2025, dated 04.09.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 85 and 74 read with Section 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act.
3. As per prosecution case, the informant has been
2/4 married with co-accused Santosh Saw and the petitioners are moreover, the brother, sister and sister-in-law of the husband of the informant. The allegation against the petitioners and other co-accused persons is that they have been demanding motorcycle and torturing the informant on non-fulfillment of their demand. Further allegation is that informant was brutally assaulted by her co-accused in-laws.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in this case. The allegations are not believable. Moreover, the allegations are general and omnibus against all the petitioners. Petitioners have no concern with the family affairs of the informant and her husband. The informant herself does not want to stay with her husband, who has filed a case for the restitution of conjugal rights in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gayajee. The husband of the informant has purchased a plot in the name of the informant on 19.04.2024 and it belies the claim of demand of motorcycle by the husband of the informant or the petitioners. Petitioner no. 2 is the mother-in-law, petitioner nos. 1 and 4 are sisters-in-law and petitioner no. 3 is brother in law of the informant respectively and they neither demanded any dowry article nor ever tortured
3/4 the informant. Learned counsel further submits that informant herself is a quarrelsome lady and she used to leave her matrimonial home leaving her five year old son behind. When she wanted to take back her son and the same was opposed by the husband, she filed this false case. The learned counsel lastly submits that the petitioners are having clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the relationship of the petitioners with the informant and also considering the general and omnibus nature of allegation levelled against them and further considering their clean antecedent and possibility of false accusation, let the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gayajee, in connection with Gaya Muffasil P.S. Case No. 911 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other following
4/4 conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the Court below, if so required by the learned trial Court.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Shahnawaz/- U T