Munni Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4086 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-97 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Munni Devi, W/o Dinesh Mahto R/o village- Siswaniya, P.S.- Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran 2.
Kismati Devi W/o Vishundeo Mahto R/o village- Siswaniya, P.S.- Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Sanful Devi W/o Parash Das R/o village- Siswaniya, P.S.- Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr.Dhannjay Kumar No 2 For the Respondent/s :
Mr.Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-04-2026
1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated 03.07.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Ramgrahwa P. S. Case No.97 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 341,323,325,308,504,506,34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(f)(g)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4086 of 2024(6) dt.16-04-2026 2/3 appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean antecedent and are women. It is next submitted that from perusal of the office report dated 24.02.2026, it would manifest that the same records:-respondent no.2 refused to put signature after receiving notice.
4. In view of the notings made in the office report, the notice is deemed to be validly served.
5. It is next submitted that informant alleges that named accused persons including the appellants came and Bachchu along with Munni Devi assaulted her with Hasua causing injury on neck.
6. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no specific allegation of assault is alleged against the appellant no.2, Kismati Devi, but then, against appellant no.1, it is alleged that she along with Bachchu assaulted her with Hasua causing injury on neck. It is next submitted that since appellants are related to Bachchu Mahto, hence they also came to be implicated. It is further submitted that no doubt, informant had suffered injury, but then, injury has been opined to be simple in
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4086 of 2024(6) dt.16-04-2026 3/3 nature and women members of the family have been implicated only to coerce the male members into submission. It is further submitted that Bachchu is not an appellant in the instant appeal. It is next submitted that this perhaps explains why informant despite receiving notice chooses not to appear and contest.
7. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the order dated 03.07.2024 is set-aside.
8. The appeal stands allowed.
9. The appellants, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Ramgrahwa P. S. Case No.97 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T