Sindhu Devi @ Sintu Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16014 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-533 Year-2024 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna ====================================================== Sindhu Devi @ Sintu Devi W/O Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar R/O VillageShankarwar Tola, Ward No. 17, P.S- Mokama, Distt.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Y.C. Verma, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Singh, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Murari Narain Chaudhary, Adv.
Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 27-06-2025 Heard Mr. Y.C. Verma, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) r/w Section 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation made in the FIR is that on account of a land dispute, the accused persons of this case, who are relatives of the informant, were pressurizing her for registering the land in their name. It has further been alleged that when the informant's uncle was coming back home along with her husband, they were stopped on the way and upon hearing the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16014 of 2025(5) dt.27-06-2025 2/3 sound of the firing when he turned back, he saw that the deceased had fallen on the ground and also saw that the son of Ajay Singh, namely, Kunal Kumar was firing a shot on the deceased whereafter the accused persons fled away from the place of occurrence.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case on account of a land dispute which an admitted position in the FIR. It is further submitted that the informant is not an eye witness to the alleged occurrence and the contents of the FIR are based on hearsay evidence provided by her uncle. It is also submitted that the specific allegation of firing the shot is confined to one Kunal Kumar and so far as the present petitioner is concerned, she is not even alleged to be present at the place of occurrence and her name features in the FIR as a conspirator on account of the land dispute. It is next submitted that one of the co-accused, namely, Ajay Singh has already been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 17.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 8498 of 2025. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is a lady with no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 30.11.2024.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16014 of 2025(5) dt.27-06-2025 3/3 informant, however, oppose the prayer for regular bail submitting that the petitioner was also involved in the said occurrence as she was also a part of the larger conspiracy.
6. Taking into consideration the rival contentions of the parties and also the fact that the presence of the petitioner at the place of occurrence has also not been specifically alleged and the allegations of opening firing is specifically on one Kunal Kumar, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees 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 Mokama P.S. Case No. 533 of 2024.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) divyanshi/- U T