Patna High Court
Deepa KumariversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties, under the conditions of Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepa Kumari, wife of Gaurav Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged alleging her involvement in a large-scale misappropriation of funds related to a drug agency, with offences under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3), 336(4), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023. She contended that she has a clean record, is a woman, and was falsely implicated by a business rival who is also the informant. The State opposed the bail, arguing that the petitioner had issued cheques in a name different from hers and that the allegations were not frivolous. The court examined the allegations, the petitioner’s cooperation prospects, and the safeguards under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. It concluded that the petitioner is unlikely to abscond and can cooperate with the investigation. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties of the same amount, along with conditions prescribed by law.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the circumstances of the FIR?
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond or tamper with evidence if bail is granted.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 336(4), 338, 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- drug agency
- financial misappropriation
- B.N.S. 2023
- Section 482(2)
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21462 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2026 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Deepa Kumari wife of Gaurav Kumar Resident of Lal Tola (Lala Tola),
Agarwa Gali No.-1, P.S.- Town Motihari, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dhurendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2),
318(4), 338, 336(3), 336(4), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.,
2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and us a woman and
the informant alleges that he owns Medoc Drug Agency at
Motihari and Gaurav is an employee, who handled purchase and
sale of drug, further Gaurav in connivance with his father,
brother, wife (petitioner) and unknown staff misappropriated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21462 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
2/4
nearly Rs.6 to Rs.7 Crore in purchase and sale of medicine and
in 2025 opened a drug agency in the name of his wife i.e.
petitioner, further Gaurav and petitioner from March, 2025 till
May, 2025 transferred money from informant’s business by
creating fake bill for medicine without purchasing, next alleges
that Gaurav would deposit money in Ayush Drug
Pharmaceutical Company of his brother Ankit and then used to
transfer reduced amount back in the informant’s company,
further Gaurav had taken a loan of Rs.87 lacs from the
informant and the same has not been repaid and presently
Gaurav is in jail in connection of a loot case.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant being wife of Gaurav. It is next submitted that from
perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest
that thrust of the allegation of misappropriation of money is
alleged against Gaurav, as far as petitioner is concerned, the
allegation against her is general and omnibus in nature. It is also
submitted that petitioner is running a drug agency in the name
of Om Enterprises which is giving competition to the informant,
as such petitioner also came to be implicated in the instant case
only to coerce her into submission.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21462 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
3/4
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner. The learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the informant submits that the amount which was
credited in the account of Om Enterprises from the company of
the informant was repaid by the petitioner by issuing cheques
but then from perusal of the cheques, it would manifest that the
informant even signed the cheques incorrectly as she has signed
the cheque by the name Roma Kumari, instead of Deepa
Kumari, on which, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the petitioner submits that if what has been submitted by the
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant is a correct
fact, in that event, the informant ought to have instituted a
separate case against the petitioner for the said offence. It is
also submitted that it does not appear probable that petitioner
would have issued cheque to the informant in the name of Roma
Kumari and the informant would have kept the cheque with
himself. It is submitted that had it been a correct fact, in that
event informant would have immediately resorted to a criminal
proceeding. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that
if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the
petitioner may not abscond rather will cooperate in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21462 of 2026(2) dt.09-04-2026
4/4
investigation to prove her innocence.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
petitioner above-named, in the event of her 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) 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 Motihari Town
P.S. Case No.05/2026, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…