Punam Devi @ Puna Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4310 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2025 Thana- PARBATTA District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Punam Devi @ Puna Devi W/o Late Umesh Chaudhary @ Late Uday Chaudhary Resident of Village- Salarpur, PS- Parbatta, District- Khagaria 2.
Nutan Kumari D/o Late Umesh Chaudhary @ Late Uday Chaudhary Resident of Village- Salarpur, PS- Parbatta, District- Khagaria 3.
Monu Kumar S/o Late Umesh Chaudhary @ Late Uday Chaudhary Resident of Village- Salarpur, PS- Parbatta, District- Khagaria ... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Anil Kumar S/o Manni Rajak Resident of Village- Salarpur, ward no. 10, PS- Parbatta, District- Khagaria ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Appellant/s :
Mr. Amar Kumar Singh For the Respondent/s :
Mr. Binay Krishna ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special P.P. for the State.
2. This is an appeal under Section 14-A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the "SC/ST Act") against the refusal of prayer for anticipatory bail vide order dated 14.07.2025 in S.A.A. No. 54/2025, passed by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge-cum-Special Judge, Khagaria in connection with Parbatta P.S. Case No. 50 of 2025 registered under Section 96 BNS as well as Sections 3(i)(r)(s)
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4310 of 2025(7) dt.15-05-2026 2/3 of the SC/ST Act.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants are persons with clean antecedent and appellants nos. 1 and 2 are women and the informant alleges that his minor sister on 07-02-2025 had gone to attend a marriage, where sonu enticed his sister and fled with her, accordingly the informant went to the house of Sonu to enquire, when his mother, Nutan and Monu said that they do not know where they have fled, thus alleges that Sonu with the help of accused persons including the appellants kidnapped his sister.
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellants have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant.
5. At this stage, the learned Special Public Prosecutor submits that the victim has been recovered and her statement was recorded under section 183 BNSS, wherein she has not supported the case of the prosecution.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the order impugned is set aside. Let the appellants, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4310 of 2025(7) dt.15-05-2026 3/3 bond of Rs.5,000/- (rupees five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending in connection with the aforesaid case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T