Lalmuni Devi @ Kailash Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20964 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-292 Year-2024 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.
Lalmuni Devi @ Kailash Devi W/o- Madan Yadav R/o Village- Jagarnadih PS-Khaira Distt- Jamui 2.
Ranjan Devi @ Ranjana Devi W/o- Sintu Yadav R/o Village- Garbhuarwar PS-Khaira Distt- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 14-08-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Khaira Police Station Case No. 292 of 2024, dated 25.07.2024, disclosing offences under Sections 3(5)/74/76/89/115(2)/126(2) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that while the informant was working in his field, a pair of ox of accused Madan Yadav entered into the informant's field and starting grazing maize crop. When the informant tried to drive out the oxen from the field
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20964 of 2025(3) dt.14-08-2025 2/3 then co-accused Madan Yadav came there and abused him. In the meanwhile, the petitioners also arrived there and started abusing the informant and on the order of accussed Madan Yadav, the petitioners assaulted the informant with kicks on her stomach knowing that the informant was 02-03 months pregnant at that point of time.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in the present case due to dispute regarding grazing of maize field of the informant by the oxen of the co-accused Madan Yadav. He next submits that the petitioner no. 1 is made accused only because she happens to be the wife of co-accused Madan Yadav. He further submits that injury report, annexed at Annexure-P/2, does not show miscarriage and other injuries are simple in nature. He also submits that both the parties have arrived at compromise by way of compromise petition, bearing B.A. No. 34 of 2025, annexed at Annexure-P/3.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State, referring to the case diary and impugned order, submits that medical report shows miscarriage and terminated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20964 of 2025(3) dt.14-08-2025 3/3 pregnancy, there is specific and direct allegation against the petitioners of assault on the stomach of the informant resulting in miscarriage.
6. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the injury report and direct allegation against the petitioners, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) ashwani/- U T