Sunita Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81125 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2025 Thana- THALI District- Nawada ====================================================== Sunita Devi, W/o Karu Chaudhary, R/o Village - Baksoti, P.S - Thali, District - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bipin Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajit Kumar, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-12-2025 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Thali P.S. Case No. 105 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 117(2), 118(1), 74, 76, 325(4), 109, 352, 351(3) and 190 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is of causing assault over the head of one Bega Chaudhary by means of iron rod, leading to serious injury.
4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that with respect to an occurrence which took place on 13.05.2025, the present FIR came to be instituted
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81125 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 2/3 on 24.05.2025, after a delay of eleven days, but without there being any plausible explanation for delay. The petitioner being a female member of the family, her name has been knowingly implicated in this case, in order to wreck vengeance and put pressure. Earlier also she had been made accused in connection with Thali P.S. Case No. 85 of 2025, on account of the previous dispute between the same parties. It is also contended that the present case is nothing but a counterblast to Thali P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025 instituted against the informant and others and this case is instituted only in order to save the skin of the informant and others. Moreover, the petitioner is a woman and undertake that she will fully cooperate in the proceeding of the Court. Taking this Court through the impugned order, it is lastly contended that be that as it may, there is no discussion with regard to the nature of injury.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that besides one criminal antecedent, the petitioner has assaulted the injured Bega Chaudhary over her head and, as such, the injury report is required to be looked into.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81125 of 2025(2) dt.09-12-2025 3/3 the inordinate delay in lodging of the FIR, coupled with the fact the petitioner is a lady, besides the fact that prior to the institution of the present case, there had already been Thali P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025 instituted by the member of the petitioners side, let the petitioner above named be released on bail, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in connection with Thali P.S. Case No. 105 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U T