Patna High Court
Rinku DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, directing release on bail upon surrender or arrest within six weeks, subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Rinku Devi and Lalan Yadav, were implicated in a FIR alleging offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 127(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023, stemming from a family dispute that led to the death of the informant's son. They applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the allegations are based merely on suspicion and that they have clean antecedents, especially noting that one petitioner is a woman. The State opposed the application, but the Court considered the earlier regular bail granted to a co‑accused, Sanjay Yadav, and the lack of substantive evidence. Relying on Section 482(2) of the BNSS, the Court held that anticipatory bail could be granted subject to bond and surety conditions. Consequently, the petitioners were ordered to be released on anticipatory bail if arrested within six weeks, upon furnishing the prescribed bonds and sureties.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail when the FIR allegations are based largely on suspicion?
- Whether the prior regular bail granted to a co‑accused influences the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners?
- Whether Section 482(2) of the BNSS empowers the Court to discharge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- suspicion
- FIR
- regular bail
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18421 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-288 Year-2025 Thana- SHEKHPURA District- Sheikhpura
======================================================
1. Rinku Devi W/o Sanjay Yadav R/o Village - Chakdiwan, P.S and District -
Sheikhpura
2. Lalan Yadav S/o Amarnath Yadav R/o Mohalla - Indai Par, P.S and District -
Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. PN Shahi, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Dinkar Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Ajit Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 1. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioners,
Mr. P.N. Shahi and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1),
61(2), 127(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits
that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and petitioner
no. 1 is a woman and is wife of Sanjay Yadav. It is further
submitted that petitioner no. 2 is also related to Sanjay Yadav
but then is related distantly. It is further submitted that as per
prosecution case, the son of the informant and daughter of
petitioner no. 1 eloped and their family members started
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18421 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/3
searching for them, the informant received a phone call from her
son that he was brutally assaulted by Sanjay Yadav and other co-
accused persons and was admitted in a hospital at Mathura,
subsequently informant received another communication that
her son was admitted in a hospital at Sheikhpura accordingly the
informant reached Sheikhpura and Sanjay Yadav along with his
family members fled away on seeing the informant, further the
informant in the hospital found her son to be dead and thus,
based on suspicion alleges that petitioners and other co-accused
persons were involved in killing of her son.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners submits
that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it
would manifest that the entire allegation hinges around
suspicion and petitioner no. 1 came to be implicated merely for
the reason that her daughter had eloped with the son of the
informant. It is further submitted that Sanjay Yadav had
approached this Court seeking regular bail by filing Criminal
Miscellaneous No. 63 of 2026 and the same came to be allowed
by an order dated 26.02.2026 passed by a learned Co-ordinate
Bench. It is next submitted that the learned Co-ordinate Bench
while granting the regular bail to Sanjay Yadv had considered
the case in detail and on merits. It is next submitted that no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18421 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
3/3
useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioners to jail
who have been implicated in the instant case based on
suspicion.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application of the petitioners.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and taking into consideration the order dated 26.02.2026 in
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 63 of 2026, the petitioners above-
named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period
of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on
furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor
court in connection with Sheikhpura P.S. Case No. 288 of 2025
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of
the BNSS.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…