Patna High Court
Rinku Kumari @ Rinku DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioner, Rinku Kumari (also known as Rinku Devi), wife of Santosh Kumar Nirala, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Narhatt PS Case No. 401 of 2025) involving alleged assault and theft under several sections of the Bihar Negotiable Statutes. The prosecution alleged that Santosh Kumar Nirala, Abhishek Kumar and Rinku Kumari assaulted the informant's son, causing injury and stealing a gold chain. The petitioner contended that she was being implicated merely as the wife of the accused and that she herself had been a victim of assault in a counter‑case. The court examined the allegations, noting the primary role of Santosh Kumar Nirala in the assault and the petitioner’s claim of grievous injury in the counter‑case. Applying Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions, including a cash bail, sureties, regular appearances before the trial court and police, and a prohibition on committing further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) CrPC in view of the allegations of assault and theft.
- Whether the presence of a counter‑case alleging injury to the petitioner affects the grant of bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed are appropriate to ensure the petitioner’s compliance and prevent misuse of liberty.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- assault
- theft
- bail conditions
- counter case
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Bihar Negotiable Statutes
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25855 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2025 Thana- NARHATT District- Nawada
======================================================
Rinku Kumari @ Rinku Devi W/O Santosh Kumar Nirala R/O Village-
Gajara, Chatar, P.S.- Narhat, District- Nawada.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajit Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard Mr. Vibhuti Ranjan Sonvadra learned Counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar for the informant besides learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Narhatt P.S. Case No. 401 of 2025 for the offence registered under
sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 117(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of
BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that
on petty dispute, the accused persons came and assault took place,
the allegation is that Santosh Kumar Nirala, Abhishek Kumar and
Rinku Kumari came as an aggressor and Santosh Kumar Nirala gave
blow on the head of Chandra Shekhar Kumar causing injury. Further,
they assaulted till he became unconscious and later Rinku Kumar
took away gold chain, he was shifted to hospital and then the FIR.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25855 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
case and counter case, the petitioner is a lady and has been dragged
only because she is wife of Santosh Kumar Nirala against whom,
there is allegation of assault on the head. Further, in the counter case,
the petitioner’s side has alleged that Rinku Devi was brutally
assaulted and she also received grievous injury.
5. Mr. Arun Kumar opposes the prayer submitting that
Santosh Kumar Nirala, Abhishek Kumar and Rinku Kumari jointly
assaulted the injured.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties, the main
role of assault is on Santosh Kumar Nirala and allegation is that he
assaulted the son of the informant, Chandra Shekhar Kumar. So far
as this petitioner is concerned, though omnibus allegation is there,
further allegation is that she took away gold chain. This Court has to
take note of the fact that in the counter case, the petitioner received
grievous injury, in that background, this Court is inclined to grant
him the anticipatory bail with conditions.
7. Let the petitioner in the event of arrest or surrender
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the order,
shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail of Rs.
10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned JM 1 st Class, Nawada in
connection with Narhatt P.S. Case No. 401 of 2025 subject to
condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25855 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
members/relatives of the petitioner, who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID) to
show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner 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 his bail bond by
the Trial court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police
station every fortnight for next six months to mark attendance and at
the end of the period, the certificate be submitted to the Court;
(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…