Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Manju DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioners, directing them to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties each.

Summary

Manju Devi and Alka Kumari were arrested in connection with a case alleging that they, along with others, assaulted a differently‑abled informant, tied her neck with a saree and disrobed her, invoking several sections of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioners contended that they were innocent, that the allegations were vague, that there was no injury report, and that they had no prior criminal record, having been in judicial custody since 11‑12‑2025. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court found the prosecution’s case insufficient to deny bail and ordered the petitioners to be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties each. The order was pronounced by Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioners despite the serious nature of the offences alleged under the IPC.
  • Whether the prosecution’s evidence is sufficient to justify continued detention.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Indian Penal Code
  • assault
  • false implication
  • judicial custody
  • surety

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10426 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-153 Year-2025 Thana- ARER District- Madhubani
                 ======================================================
           1.     Manju Devi, D/o Arjun Yadav, R/o Village- Arer Tole Sinuwara, P.S.- Arer,
                  District- Madhubani
           2.    Alka Kumari @ Alka Devi, D/o Arjun Yadav, R/o Village- Arer Tole
                 Sinuwara, P.S.- Arer, District- Madhubani

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Jitendra Kumar Bharti, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   20-02-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioners have prayed for bail in connection

                   with Arer P.S. Case No. 153 of 2025 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 76, 303(2),

                   352, 351(2) of B.N.S.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioners along with others have abused the informant who is

                   differently-abled lady. It is alleged that Arjun Yadav and Arun

                   Yadav have assaulted her and disrobed her. The allegation against

                   the petitioners is that they have tied the neck of the informant with

                   saree.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10426 of 2026(2) dt.20-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                       petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have

                       committed no offence. They have been falsely implicated in this

                       case. They are neighbours. The main thrust of allegation is against

                       Arjun Yadav and Arun Yadav. In last part of the F.I.R. the

                       allegations are implicated against the petitioners. From perusal of

                       the order of learned trial Court it is clear that there is no injury

                       report of the informant. Moreover, the allegation is general and

                       omnibus. Petitioners are having no criminal antecedent and they

                       are languishing in judicial custody since 11.12.2025.

                                    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                       for the State.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                       inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.         The above named

                       petitioners are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

                       bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) each with two

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

                       S.D.J.M., Benipatti, Madhubani in connection with Arer P.S. Case

                       No.153 of 2025.


                                                         (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.