Urmila Devi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86977 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2016 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Urmila Devi S/o Pundev Mahto Resident of Village- Sripur Gopalpur, P.S.- Sugauli, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dhannjay Kumar No 2 For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2.
The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504 and 34 of IPC.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a woman and the informant alleges that accused persons intercepted him and started assaulting on 21-1-2016 at 10:00 am by iron rod, lathi etc., when he was going to fetch water, further Pundev assaulted him by axe causing injury on head and petitioner snatched mangalsutra of his sister and snatched Rs. 1,200/- from his pocket.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86977 of 2025(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/3 petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegation of snatching mangalsutra and Rs. 1,200/- is ornamental. It is also submitted that allegation of assaulting the informant is against Pundev. It is further submitted that no doubt the case is of the year 2016, but then investigation in the case is still continuing, as would manifest from the order impugned. It is also submitted that police, in these 10 years, did not make any endeavour to arrest the petitioner nor sought process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.PC.
5.
Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into consideration the fact that petitioner is a woman, the petitioner above-named, in the event of her arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sugauli P.S. Case No. 56 of 2016, subject to the conditions
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86977 of 2025(2) dt.12-03-2026 3/3 as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T