Patna High Court
Lal Muni Devi @ Lal Munni DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC, subject to monetary deposit, sureties and stringent conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, four women residents of Sohgai village, were implicated in a FIR (Gaurichak PS Case No. 546/2022) for alleged offences including rioting, criminal force and damage to property during an incident involving the Chief Minister’s convoy. They argued that they were merely by‑standers, had no criminal antecedent, and were being arrested solely because they were present. The State opposed bail, contending that the accused had harassed and damaged vehicles accompanying the convoy. The Court considered the omnibus nature of the allegations, the petitioners’ lack of prior criminal record, and the humanitarian aspect of their willingness to contribute to the Chief Minister’s Relief Fund. Applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash deposit, sureties, and strict conditions including cooperation with investigation and non‑interference with witnesses. The bail order required each petitioner to deposit Rs 1,000 to the Relief Fund and to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code despite multiple serious IPC charges.
- Whether the presence of the petitioners at the scene, without any specific role, justifies granting bail.
- What conditions, if any, should be imposed on the anticipatory bail to safeguard the investigation and trial.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 188, 307, 323, 332, 333, 337, 338, 341, 342, 353, 427, 504, 506, 509
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Indian Penal Code offences
- bail conditions
- relief fund contribution
- women defendants
- political convoy incident
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18208 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-546 Year-2022 Thana- GAURICHAK District- Patna
======================================================
1. Lal Muni Devi @ Lal Munni Devi Wife of Vijay Ram (but wrongly
mentioned as son of Late Kathin Ram in Impugned order dated 03-12-2025).
R/o Village - Sohgai, P.S. - Gaurichak, Dist. - Patna.
2. Guriya Devi Wife of Santosh Ram R/o Village - Sohgai, P.S. - Gaurichak,
Dist. - Patna.
3. Sarita Devi Wife of Nitish Kumar @ Nepali R/o Village - Sohgai, P.S. -
Gaurichak, Dist. - Patna.
4. Vijay Ram Son of Late Kathin Ram (Wrongly written as Kathin Ram in
impugned order dated 03-12-2025). R/o Village - Sohgai, P.S. - Gaurichak,
Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 18-05-2026 Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case No. 546/2022
institutedundersections147,148,149,341,342,323,307,504,
506,332,333,337,338,353,188,427,509 /120-B lodged on
21.08.2022 by the informant, Veena Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the B.D.O.,
Sampatchak, Patna lodged the FIR alleging that keeping the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18208 of 2026(3) dt.18-05-2026
2/4
dead body of Sunny Kumar in the middle of the road, the locals
blocked it and created nuisance. In the meantime, cavalcade of
Hon’ble the Chief Minister was crossing and it was also
subjected to damage. This led to the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
they are locals, three of them are house-wives, no role to play
and only because they were watching the episode, got
implicated. No specific role has been assigned to them.
5. The last submission is that irrespective of the
outcome of the present case and/or accepting the allegation, the
petitioners intend to contribute Rs.1000/- each to the Chief
Minister's Relief Fund through Demand Draft issued by the
local branch of the State Bank of India.
6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
those passing through were harassed and they also damaged the
vehicles accompanying the cavalcade of the Hon’ble the Chief
Minister.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts as also the
omnibus allegation is there against all of them, three of them are
ladies, none have criminal antecedent, in that background, this
Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory
bail subject to payment of Rs.1000/- each to the Chief
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18208 of 2026(3) dt.18-05-2026
3/4
Minister's Relief Fund through Demand Draft issued by the
local branch of the State Bank of India.
8. Let the petitioners be released on bail, in the event
of their arrest or surrender before the concerned court within a
period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties
of the like amount each in connection with Gaurichak P.S. Case
No. 546/2022 to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief
Judicial Magistrate-I, Patna City subject to the conditions as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. as also the other
conditions.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Driving License/Voter ID/Pan Card
etc.) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) The petitioners shall be appearing before the
police station as and when required for cooperating in the
investigation;
(iii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18208 of 2026(3) dt.18-05-2026
4/4
(iv) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/S. Prasad
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.