Pinki Devi @ Neha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88989 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-768 Year-2025 Thana- BHABHUA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Pinki Devi @ Neha Wife of Umesh Ram Resident of Village- Majhiaon, P.S.- Bhagwanpur, District- Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Parwej Khan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 22-01-2026 Heard Mr. Parwej Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Bhabua P.S. Case No. 768 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 127, 318(4), 307, 351(2), 352 & 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the coaccused person has solemnized the marriage of the informant with the petitioner and it is alleged that Arvind Pandey and others have extracted cash from the informant, and he was also forced to give Rs. 1.5 lakhs as the expenses of marriage.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88989 of 2025(2) dt.22-01-2026 2/2 case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from the perusal of the FIR, it will transpire that the only role of the petitioner is that her marriage was solemnized with the informant. There is no allegation against the petitioner that she has cheated the informant or has taken any single penny from him. He further submits that the petitioner is a lady and she is languishing in judicial custody since 14.10.2025.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaimur at Bhabua in connection with Bhabua P.S. Case No. 768 of 2025.

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