Rukmani Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82158 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2025 Thana- GARHI District- Jamui ====================================================== 1.

Rukmani Devi Wife of Mukesh Yadav R/o Village - Arunmabank, P.S. - Garhi, Dist. - Jamui.

2.

Sarita Devi @ Neelam Kumari D/o Yogendra Yadav, Wife of Dabloo Yadav R/o Village - Arunmabank, P.S. - Garhi, Dist. - Jamui. 3.

Salita Devi Wife of Sunil Yadav @ Surendra Yadav R/o Village - Arunmabank, P.S. - Garhi, Dist. - Jamui.

4.

Saran Yadav @ Sharan Yadav Son of Huro Yadav R/o Village - Arunmabank, P.S. - Garhi, Distt. - Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. Petitioners apprehends their arrest in connection with Garhi P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 354(4), 329(3), 651(2), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the named accused persons, including the petitioners, assaulted his brother, Yogendra Yadav, and two women members of his family. It has further been alleged that

2/4 accused Dablu Yadav assaulted on the neck of the informant's wife, resulting in grievous injury and that all the accused persons assaulted everybody from the prosecution side. It is also alleged that the dispute was with regard to a land.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that from perusal of the F.I.R., it would be evident that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the petitioners and that no specific role has been attributed to any particular petitioner. It has further been submitted that there exists a case and counter case between the parties and that petitioner no. 4 has also lodged Garhi PS Case No. 100 of 2025 against the prosecution side. It has next been submitted that the injuries allegedly sustained by the prosecution side was found to be simple in nature.

5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the

3/4 satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Garhi P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.

(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.

(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.

(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond. (v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond

4/4 of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

7. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) aditya/- U