Lagni Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69829 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2025 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Lagni Devi W/o Guddu Manjhi R/o Village- Jogajhingoi, P.S.- Khaira, District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amar Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar No. 3, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that his sister was married to Sonu Kumar Sah, about 18 years ago, but Sonu Kumar Sah used to torture her as she was not able to conceive, though his sister had conceived, but the child, at the time of delivery, died. It is further alleged that Sonu Kumar Sah performed his second marriage with Lagni Devi (petitioner). It is next alleged that the sister of the informant on 20-2-2025 called and disclosed that Sonu Kumar Sah and Lagni Devi forcibly administered poison,
2/4 accordingly, the informant reached the place of occurrence and found the dead body of his sister lying.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that sister of the informant was married to Sonu Kumar Sah about 18 years back. It is next submitted that since sister of the informant was not conceiving, as such, some dispute had arisen but subsequently she conceived and the child died, at the time of delivery, on account of which the victim started remaining in depression and, thus, committed suicide. It is also submitted that the marriage was 18 years old and if Sonu Kumar Sah was torturing the sister of the informant in the manner as alleged in that event either the victim or the informant would have instituted a case but then the same was not done.
It is further submitted that no doubt, in the FIR, it is alleged that Sonu Kumar Sah performed his second marriage with the petitioner, but then it is asserted and submitted that Sonu Kumar Sah neither prior nor after the death of the victim has performed his second marriage. It is next submitted that Sonu Kumar Sah had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr.
3/4 Misc. No. 51864 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 22.09.2025 wherein it is recorded -- It is also submitted that no doubt in the FIR it is alleged that petitioner (Sonu Kumar Sah) performed his second marriage with Lagni Devi (petitioner herein), but then a supplementary affidavit has been filed, wherein at Para-3, it has been specifically pleaded that petitioner (Sonu Kumar Sah) neither prior nor after the death of the victim performed his second marriage. It is further submitted that petitioner is wife of Guddu Manjhi and has children out of the wedlock, but in order to give serious colour to the case, a false allegation has been alleged. It is next submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove her innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the order dated 22.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 51864 of 2025, let the petitioner, above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
4/4 like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 80 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
7. However, if the investigating officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioner despite giving assurance to this Court is not cooperating in the investigation, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T