Patna High Court
Suniti Kumari MehtaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and specified conditions.
Summary
Suniti Kumari Mehta was arrested in connection with a case alleging that she assaulted a neighbor (the informant) with a gadasi, causing a cut injury to the neck. The petitioner argued that the incident arose from a spontaneous verbal altercation linked to a land and boundary dispute, that there was no repetition of the assault, and that she has a clean criminal record. The State and the informant opposed anticipatory bail, contending that the injury was to a vital part of the body. The court considered the background dispute, the petitioner’s lack of antecedents, and the nature of the injury, and concluded that anticipatory bail was appropriate. Accordingly, the court granted anticipatory bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. Act.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S. Act in view of the alleged assault.
- Whether the alleged injury and the nature of the offence attract the denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- neighbor dispute
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNS
- clean antecedent
- injury to vital part
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23397 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-358 Year-2025 Thana- CHHAURADANO District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Suniti Kumari Mehta Son of Sahil Mehta Resident of Village - Balirama, P.S.
- Chhauradano.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kundan Rathore @ Kundan Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bharat Lal, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the
informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Chhauradano P.S. Case No. 358 of 2025 in a
case registered for the offence punishable under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 110, 352, 351(2) and later on 109(1) of
the BNS, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is alleged
to have abused and assaulted the informant with gadasi on neck
due to which she sustained cut injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it
would be evident from the first information report itself that a
verbal altercation took place between the petitioner and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23397 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
2/3
informant on account of which it is stated that she inflicted a
gadasi blow on the neck of the informant due to which she
sustained bleeding injury. It is further submitted that the
petitioner and the informant are neighbors having land dispute
and also a dispute with regard to boundary. It is further
submitted that the injury sustained by the informant is no doubt
in the nature of a incised wound on the left side of the neck but
it would appear from the bail rejection order that in paragraph
29 of the case diary, the final opinion with regard to the injury is
said to be normal study. It has also been submitted that Section
109 of the BNS would not be attracted as there is no allegation
of any repetition of blow. Further, the petitioner is a lady having
clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP
for the State have vehemently opposed the application for
anticipatory bail by stating that the petitioner has inflicted injury
on vital part of the informant causing injury.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and also considering the background of a dispute
which took place at the spur of the moment coupled with the
fact that there is a dispute between two neighbors and the
petitioner is a lady having no criminal antecedent, let the above
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23397 of 2026(2) dt.18-04-2026
3/3
named petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before
the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from
today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with Chhauradano
P.S. Case No. 358 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.,
subject to the conditions that:
(I) One of the bailors will be a family member/close
relative.
(II) The petitioner shall cooperate in the
investigation/trial and in case of non-cooperation, the
prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for
cancelling the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
priyanka/-
U T
Checking your session…