Anita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4883 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA THANA District- Begusarai ====================================================== 1.

Anita Devi W/O Gorelal Singh R/O Vill.- Telaunch, P.S.- Chauthan, Dist.- Khagaria.

2.

Gorelal Singh S/O late Jagdish Singh R/O Vill.- Telaunch, P.S.- Chauthan, Dist.- Khagaria.

... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar Patna 2.

Rinku Kumari C/O Late Bhuwaneshwar Ram R/O Vill.- Karor, P.S.- Cheriyabariyarpur, Dist.- Begusarai.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Advocate For the State :

Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl.P.P.

For the Respondent :

Mr. Saroj Kr. Sharma, Advocate Md. Mobashir Khan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order dated 07.11.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge SC/ST (POA) Act, Begusarai whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Mahila P.S. Case no. 37 of 2025 under Sections 69, 115(2), 352, 3(5), 304(2) of B.N.S. and Sections 3(1) (r)(s)(w), 3(2)(va) 3(2) (va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4883 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2026 2/3

3. The case of the respondent is that respondent was having relationship with one Niraj Kumar. It is further alleged that he has established physical relationship with her on the false promise of marriage. She is pregnant. It is further alleged that she was brought to Khagaria Bazar for MTP. The allegations against the appellants who are father and mother of the Niraj that they were also not ready for the marriage and they have abused her with caste name and assaulted her.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that appellants have been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that from perusal of the FIR, it is clear that the main thrust of allegation is against one Niraj. The appellants have been impleaded in this case as they are the parents of the main accused Niraj Kumar. As far as the allegations against abusing the respondent with caste name is concerned, the same is general and omnibus in nature. A statement has been made in para-3 of this petition that the appellants have got no criminal antecedent. Moreover, they are languishing in judicial custody since 01.11.2025.

5. The appeal for bail is opposed by learned Spl. P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the respondent.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4883 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2026 3/3 taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of this case, the Court is inclined to allow the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order dated 07.11.2025 is hereby set aside.

7. The appellants are directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Mahila P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) on each of them with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Exclusive Special Judge-SC/ST (POA) Act, Begusarai.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) shubham/- U T