Patna High Court

Sushma DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 27 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Sushma Devi, was arrested in connection with the alleged abduction and murder of an informant's son, charged under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution’s case is based on the informant’s allegation, with no eyewitness testimony linking the petitioner to the crime. The petitioner contended that she was falsely implicated, highlighting the delayed filing of the FIR and the lack of direct evidence, and noted that co‑accused persons had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. Considering the absence of incriminating evidence, the length of custody, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the court allowed the bail application, ordering release on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
Whether the prosecution’s evidence is sufficient to justify denial of bail?

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 138, 140(1), 140(3), 142, 238, 3(5), 61(2)

Subjects

regular bail
criminal procedure
abduction
murder
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
bail application
Indian criminal law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86887 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-400 Year-2024 Thana- HARNAUT District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Sushma Devi W/o NIraj Kumar @ Pushkar Kumar Resident of Village-
                 Ramsang Dihra, P.S.- Harnaut, District- Nalanda, Bihar

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Sukesh Ranjan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Rajendra Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   27-01-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State .

                                 2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Sessions Trial No.161 of 2025 arising out of Harnaut P.S. Case

                   No. 400 of 2024 in a case registered for the offences punishable

                   under Sections 138, 140(1), 140(3), 142 and 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, later on 103(1), 238 and 61(2)

                   of the B.N.S. were also added.

                                3 . As per prosecution story, the son of the informant

                   left his house and went to visit some fair but did not return and

                   thereafter, the informant named the petitioners and other

                   coaccused for being involved in the abduction of her son with

                   intention of killing. Later on , the dead body of the son of the

                   informant was found.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86887 of 2025(2) dt.27-01-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner is quite innocent and has falsely been implicated in

          this case. He further submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. it is

          evident that informant is not the eye witness of the alleged

          occurrence and only a suspicion has been raised against this

          petitioner by the informant. During course of investigation none

          of the witnesses have claimed to have seen the petitioner

          committing the alleged occurrence. It is further submitted that

          the son of the informant went missing on 12/13.10.2024, but

          informant did not lodge any report and the written report was

          lodged for the first time on 17.10.2024 after recovery of dead

          body. Similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Shakila

          Devi and Asha Devi have been granted bail by a Co-ordinate

          Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 06.08.2025 passed

          in Cr. Misc. No.21451 of 2025. Petitioner is in custody since

          13.11.2024.

                       5 . Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the bail

          application of the petitioner.

                        6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case and period of custody , the bail application is

          allowed. Let the above named petitioner be released on bail on

          furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86887 of 2025(2) dt.27-01-2026
                                                        3/3




                      sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

                      District and Sessions Judge-2nd, Biharsharif, Nalanda , in

                      connection with Harnaut P.S. Case No. 400 of 2024 .



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Koushik/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…