Puja Devi @ Puja Kumari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54655 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2024 Thana- DHAMDAHA District- Purnia ====================================================== Puja Devi @ Puja Kumari W/o Krishna Kumar Jaiswal @ Krishna Jaiswal Resident of village- Itahri, Ward no. 11, PS- Dhamdaha, District- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. N. K. Agrawal- Sr. Advocate Mr. Bidhu Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026

1. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in Dhamdaha P. S. Case No. 201 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 118, 103 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that informant (father in-law of the petitioner) alleges that his elder son Krishna Kumar was asking him to partition the property, but he had refused, as such, on 14.07.2024, Krishna Kumar Jaiswal along with his wife i.e. petitioner came to the house and assaulted Alok Jaiswal (younger son of the informant) and when he raised an alarm, the wife of the informant along with Puja, wife of Alok came to save him when

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54655 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026 2/3 Krishna Kumar and petitioner assaulted them by Dabiya and thereafter, Krishna Kumar fled to his matrimonial home along with the petitioner and the injured were brought to the hospital, but the doctor declared his wife dead i.e. mother in-law of the petitioner.

4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R., it would manifest that no specific allegation of assault is alleged against the petitioner. It is next submitted that informant is not eye witness to the occurrence, but then, fairly submits that charges have been framed and trial has commenced and one witness has been examined.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application and submits that FIR has been instituted by the father in-law of the petitioner, who specifically alleges that this petitioner along with her husband i.e. son of the informant committed the occurrence of assault leading to death of his wife i.e. own mother of Krishna Kumar Jaiswal and mother in-law of the petitioner. It is also submitted that informant may not be an eye witness to the occurrence, but then, it appears that he was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.54655 of 2025(3) dt.24-02-2026 3/3 informed by the injured persons about the occurrence. It is also submitted that FIR is not an encyclopedia. It is next submitted that since trial has commenced, as such, no useful purpose would be served by releasing the petitioner on bail.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.

7. The prayer of the petitioner for regular bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T