← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./81302/2025bail granted

Parvati Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2025-12-22Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81302 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-258 Year-2023 Thana- PIYAR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Parvati Devi Wife of Raktu Sahani @ Rakatu Sahani Resident of village - Badgaon, P.S.- Piyar, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Khushi Awadh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-12-2025 Heard Ms. Khushi Awadh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in connection with Piyar P.S. Case No. 258 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 28.11.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 447, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the First Information Report, due to land dispute the petitioner along with other co-accused persons came armed with lathi, danda, iron rod to the land of one Abhishek Kumar, who is nephew of the informant and started abusing the informant. On protest, the accused persons assaulted the informant and his family members.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81302 of 2025(2) dt.22-12-2025 2/3 present case. There is case and counter case between the parties. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is specific allegation against coaccused persons, namely, Mukesh Sahni and Raktu Sahni and allegation against the petitioner is that she along with other coaccused person threw bricks upon the informant and his family members and apart from that injury inflicted upon the injured person is simple in nature.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner on the ground that petitioner carries one criminal antecedent but fairly submits on the basis of paragraph-3 of the bail application that she is on bail in the pending matter.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against the petitioner and injury inflicted upon the injured person is simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Xth, Muzaffarpur in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81302 of 2025(2) dt.22-12-2025 3/3 connection with Piyar P.S. Case No. 258 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T