Meena Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3766 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-44 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Meena Devi W/o Sunil Raut R/o Village- Chandpur, P.S.- Baniyapur, DistrictSaran ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Manju Kumari Daughter of Chandrama Ram R/o Village- Chandpur, P.S.- Baniyapur, District- Saran ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Alka Panday For the Respondent/s :

Ms.Usha Kumari 1 Mr.Hira Sharma Mr.Mrityunjay Kumar Tiwary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-07-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The appellant has challenged the order dated 16.05.2025 passed by the learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Chapra, Saran in connection with Baniyapur P. S. Case No. 44 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 127(1), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby her 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.3766 of 2025(4) dt.06-07-2026 2/3 appellant submits that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that on 29.01.2025 at 8.00 P.M., she had gone to attend nature's call, when Sunil, Meena and Sulekha started abusing, on objection Sunil slapped her and abused her by taking caste name. Again at 3.00 P.M., accused persons came in a drunken condition and the appellant was also carrying a lathi. Further, accused assaulted her mother causing injury on head and also assaulted her brother Ranjay causing injury on head.

4. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has 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 allegations are in two parts. It is next submitted that in the first part, it is alleged that when informant had gone to attend nature's call, the accused persons intercepted her and Sunil slapped her and abused her by taking caste name, but then no FIR came to be instituted thereafter in the second part, it is alleged that at 3.00 P.M. accused persons came to her house and committed the occurrence as recorded herein above. It is thus submitted that entire occurrence took place at the house of the informant and thus was not in public view. It is also submitted

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3766 of 2025(4) dt.06-07-2026 3/3 that though it is alleged that appellant also present at the place of occurrence with lathi, but then from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegation of assault is not specific.

5. The learned Special P. P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the appeal.

6. Considering the submissions and taking into consideration the fact that appellant is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman, the appellant, above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on her furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST, Chapra, Saran in connection with Baniyapur P. S. Case No. 44 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

7. The appeal stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T