Karina Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30882 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- BELA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== 1.
Karina Devi W/O Ravi Ray @ Ravi Kumar R/O Vill.- Ward no. 5 Maliyawari, P.S.- Bela, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
2.
Sunita Devi W/O Shambhu Ray R/O Vill.- Ward no. 5 Maliyawari, P.S.- Bela, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
3.
Ravi Ray @ Ravi Kumar S/O Shambhu Ray R/O Vill.- Ward no. 5 Maliyawari, P.S.- Bela, Dist.- Sitamarhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Parwej Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nawal Kishore Pd., APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Bela P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 303(2), 109(1), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case which has been lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant to the effect that on the date of occurrence the petitioners along with other coaccused persons started assaulting the informant due to some altercation that took place on the date of occurrence. It is alleged that petitioner no. 1 Karina Devi snatched gold chain from the
2/4 neck of the informant and the petitioner no. 3 assaulted the informant with iron rod on her head, due to which she sustained injuries.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there was a free fight in between the parties on the same day for which the petitioner no.1 also lodged Bela P.S. Case No. 194 of 2025, in which the informant of the present case and her family members have also been made accused. He further submits that there is a delay of six days in lodging the F.I.R. and no explanation for the said delay has been given. As a matter of fact, the informant and the petitioners are neighbours and for pathway the present occurrence is said to have taken place. He further submits that the petitioners had earlier filed anticipatory bail petition before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XV, Sitamarhi, however, the same was rejected, wherein it has been stated that the injuries found on the person of informant were simple in nature.
The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that subsequently the parties have compromised the case and a compromise petition has already been filed before the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi. The petitioners have got one criminal antecedent.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail.
3/4
6. Having heard the rival submissions of the parties and after going through the records, it appears that a free fight occurred in between the parties for which both the sides have lodged case and counter case against each other. Further from perusal of the order dated 18.02.2026 passed in A.B.P. No. 1572 of 2026, whereby the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioners was rejected earlier by the learned court concerned, it would appear that the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-XV, Sitamarhi has recorded in his order that the injuries found to be simple in nature.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of injuries found on the person of informant, let the petitioners, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi in connection with Bela P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with further condition:
(1) The learned Court concerned shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed his criminal
4/4 antecedents, the court concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. (Ritesh Kumar, J) vinita/- U