Shalini Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21596 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1028 Year-2023 Thana- COMPLAINT CASE - PATNA CITY District- Patna ====================================================== Shalini Kumari Wife of Ramesh Kumar Resident of village- Bara, Ps- Bara, Dist- Nalanda, At Present Resident of Karma, Ps- Narhat, Dist- Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Vicky Singh son of Brijnandan Singh Resident of village- Station Road, PsFathua, Dist- Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shambhu Narayan Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 16-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 1028 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 452, 323, 427, 420, 406, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, lodged by the complainant Vicky Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the allegation is that the petitioner alongwith co-accused Bablu Kumar used to cheat people in the name of providing job and in the process, took Rupees Ten Lakhs. As it was not possible for her to provide job, the complainant sent notice where after the allegation is that the accused persons including this persons entered his home on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21596 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/2 ground that he had sent notices assaulted him. Before leaving, they also destroyed the valuable house hold properties of the complainant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no such transaction took place, though the complainant alleges that it has been given in cash but no receipt is there. Further, the assault theory and/or the destroying of the house hold properties are exaggerated version.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that a perusal of the F.I.R. would show that the accused entered the house of the complainant and assaulted. Further, they also destroyed valuable house hold properties.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the role played by the petitioner as alleged, no relief can be extended to her.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T