Patna High Court

Nunuday DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 11 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The Court granted pre‑arrest bail to the petitioners.

Summary

The petitioners, five women from Kashipur village, were named in an FIR alleging that they, along with co‑accused, assaulted an informant and his family with a lathi, iron rod and a dabiya, causing injuries to six persons, two of which were grievous. The petitioners contended that the FIR contained only a general, omnibus allegation against them and no specific overt act, and highlighted a 12‑day delay in filing the FIR without a plausible explanation, while also asserting their clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail application, seeking to keep the petitioners in custody. The Court examined the lack of specific charges against the petitioners, the delay in lodging the FIR, and the petitioners’ gender and clean record, and concluded that these factors warranted the grant of pre‑arrest bail. Accordingly, the Court ordered that each petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the CrPC and within eight weeks of the order.

Issues considered

Whether a pre‑arrest bail can be granted when the FIR contains only general allegations and no specific overt act against the accused.
Whether the delay of 12 days in lodging the FIR is a sufficient ground to deny bail.
Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and gender are relevant considerations for granting bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 325, 34, 341, 354, 379, 447, 504, 506

Subjects

pre‑arrest bail
Section 438 CrPC
general allegation
delay in FIR
women accused
IPC offences
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2239 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-374 Year-2021 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
               ======================================================
           1 . Nunuday Devi Son of Gholat Yadav Resident of Village - Kashipur, P.S. -

                 Murliganj, District - Madhepura.
           2.    Suchita Devi Wife of Late Kishan Yadav Resident of Village - Kashipur, P.S.

                 - Murliganj, District - Madhepura.
           3.    Mila Devi Wife of Tuntun Yadav Resident of Village - Kashipur, P.S. -

                 Murliganj, District - Madhepura.
           4.    Sabita Devi Wife of Ghhotelal Yadav @ Chhotkan Resident of Village -

                 Kashipur, P.S. - Murliganj, District - Madhepura.
           5.    Gauri Devi Wife of Late Janardan Yadav Resident of Village - Kashipur, P.S.

                 - Murliganj, District – Madhepura

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :

                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Barun Kumar Singh, Advocate

                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP

                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   11-02-2026                          Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

                   State .

                                 2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for

                   the offence punishable under Section 447, 341, 323, 325, 307,

                   354A, 379, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code .

                                 3 . As per prosecution case , informant alleged that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2239 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
                                            2/3




          these petitioners alongwith other co-accused persons, armed

          with lathi, iron rod and dabiya, came at the door of the

          informant and thereafter, abused and assaulted informant and his

          family members, as a result of which, six persons sustained

          injuries, out of whom, two of them have sustained grievous

          injuries.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

          specific accusation of assault by Dabiya is against co-accused

          Gholat Yadav and Subodh Yadav . So far as these petitioners are

          concerned, there is general and omnibus allegation and no

          specific overt act has been alleged against them. He further

          submits that there is delay of 12 days in lodging the F.I.R. and

          there is no plausible explanation of delay . Petitioners are ladies

          and claim clean antecedent.

                       5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer

          for bail.

                        6. Considering the facts of the case, this pre-arrest

          bail petition is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within

          eight weeks from today, let the petitioners, above named, be

          released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten

          thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of the J.M. 1st Class, Madhepura in connection with
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2239 of 2026(2) dt.11-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      Murliganj P.S. Case No. 374 of 2021, subject to the conditions

                      laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal

                      Procedure .



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Koushik/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…