Nirmala Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86396 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-213 Year-2025 Thana- PATKHAULI District- West Champaran ====================================================== 1.

Nirmala Devi Wife of Prakash Ram R/o Village - Patilar, Police Station -Chautarwa, District - West Champaran.

2.

Prakash Ram Son of Chuni Ram R/o Village - Patilar, Police Station -Chautarwa, District - West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vijay Kr Singh No. 1 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 04-02-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 61(2)(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner no.1 is a woman and the informant alleges that she runs an NGO namely Jan Shakti Foundation for upliftment of women. Further, on 02.09.2025, she received an information that minor girls are being procured for their transportation to Haryana and Rajasthan. On information, she along with the police force

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86396 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026 2/3 reached the P.O. and four persons were arrested who disclosed their name as Sumit, Sonveer, Shobha and Shabana Khatoon. Further, Sumit disclosed that Shobha and Shabana procured minors on pretext of marriage and were taken to Haryana and Rajasthan where Sonveer used to sell them for Rs.One Lac to 1.5 Lac and Shobha along with Shabana used to get Rs.15,000/- per girl. Further, Sumit also disclosed that petitioners and other named accused persons are also involved in the trade.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case. It is submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that name of the petitioners transpired in the confessional statement of Sumit in police custody, which does not have any evidentiary value. It is also submitted that during the course of investigation, nothing transpired which could even remotely connect the petitioners with the offence except for confession of Sumit. It is also submitted that Sumit and Sonveer has been granted the privilege of regular bail by this Court.

5. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad vehemently opposes the anticipatory bail application. It is submitted that allegations are serious. It is fairly submitted that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86396 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026 3/3 no doubt, name of the petitioners transpired in the confessional statement of Sumit, but then, whether petitioners were involved in the occurrence or not that requires to be investigated for which custody of the petitioners is necessary. It is also submitted that flesh trade is gaining grounds in State of Bihar also, as such, leniency be not shown to the petitioners on technical ground.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned A.P.P., the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. The prayer of the petitioners for anticipatory bail stands rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T