Nisha Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27873 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2024 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Nisha Devi W/O Indrajit Mahto R/O Triloki Nagar, P.S.- Raxaul, DistrictEast Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar.
2.
Kavita Devi W/O Promod Mahto R/O Trilokinagar, P.S.- Raxaul, DistrictEast Champaran. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms.Prerna Rishi, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Asha Devi, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 22-08-2025 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The accused/petitioner apprehending her arrest in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 167 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366A, 120B, 376DA, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
3. As per FIR, petitioner alongwith other co-accused called 12 years minor daughter of the informant from her home and, thereafter, hand over to one co-accused Sohail Khan thereafter, she further supplied to another co-accused Jitendra. It was said by victim upon recovery to the informant that she was
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27873 of 2025(4) dt.22-08-2025 2/3 raped by several accused persons.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the present FIR was lodged with a delay of three days i.e. on 12.05.2024 for the occurrence i.e. 09.05.2024. It is pointed out that aforesaid delay is not appears explained through FIR. It is also submitted by learned counsel that victim left her house on her own due to love affairs which can be gathered from FIR, as the allegation of instigation is not available against petitioner. It is also pointed out that upon recovery nothing incriminating found medically upon victim, which prima facie suggest that rape/penetrative sexual assault was not committed upon her. While concluding argument, it is pointed out that petitioner is a lady of clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail submitted that as petitioner alongwith other co-accused, namely, Sheetal Kumari after taking victim in confidence brought her to nearby market from her home and, thereafter she was hand over to the co-accused Sohail Khan, who further supplied her to coaccused Jitendra. It is submitted that the allegation is very specific against this petitioner and this fact also supported by victim while recording her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C.
6. Despite of service, none appeared on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27873 of 2025(4) dt.22-08-2025 3/3 informant to join present pending proceedings.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and by taking note of fact as the petitioner played active role to call informant from her home and her active involvement qua crime in question was also supported by the victim while recording her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., accordingly prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner stands rejected. (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) veena/- U T