Patna High Court
Khushbu Devi @ Khushbu Kumari GiriversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted bail to both petitioners, holding that the rape allegation does not apply to them and that bail is permissible under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Petitioners Khushbu Devi and Rajesh Kumar Giri, relatives of co‑accused Anil Giri, were implicated in a case (Taraiya PS Case No. 295 of 2024) involving alleged blackmail, a viral video, and a rape allegation against Anil Giri. They applied for bail, contending that the rape charge pertained only to Anil Giri and that they have clean antecedents. The State, represented by the Additional Public Prosecutor, argued that the petitioners were also involved in the blackmail allegation, though it conceded that the rape charge was solely against Anil Giri. The Court examined the factual submissions and noted that the petitioners were prima facie linked to the co‑accused but not to the rape allegation. Relying on Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, the Court ordered that both petitioners be released on bail with a bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties each, subject to the conditions prescribed by the trial court. The order effectively disposes of the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are liable for the rape allegation or only for the blackmail offence.
- Whether bail can be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita — s. 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 482(2), 64
- Income Tax Act — s. 67
Subjects
- bail
- blackmail
- rape allegation
- criminal procedure
- Section 482
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Income Tax Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34639 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2024 Thana- TARAIYA District- Saran
======================================================
1. Khushbu Devi @ Khushbu Kumari Giri D/o Kalika Giri Resident of Village
- Sakddi Bharti Tola, PS- Amnaur, Dist- Chhapra Saran.
2. Rajesh Kumar Giri @ Rajesh Giri S/o Kalika Giri Resident of Village -
Sakddi, PS- Amnaur, Dist- Chhapra Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Annu Devi W/O Late Brajesh Giri village po-Bhagwatpur Gosai Tola P.S
Taraiya saran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shatrughna Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Chandra Sen Prasad Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Vishesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
Mr. Basant Kumar Singh, Advocate
Ms. Shaambhavi Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
5 20-01-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on
behalf of the State.
2. The accused/petitioners apprehending their arrest in
connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 295 of 2024 registered for
the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 303(2), 352,
351(2), (3), 64, 3(5) of Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and 67 of I.T. Act.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is to blackmail
the informant under garb of making the video viral qua intimate
relationship with husband of petitioner no. 1.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34639 of 2025(5) dt.20-01-2026
2/3
behalf of the petitioners that the thrust of allegation qua rape and
making the video viral is available against co-accused Anil Giri. It
is pointed out that petitioner no. 1 is the wife of the co-accused
Anil Giri, against whom the allegation of rape is available and she
was implicated only for said relation. It is further submitted that
petitioner no. 2 is brother-in-law of co-accused Anil Giri. It is also
pointed out that during Corona period in fact the husband of
petitioner helped the informant in treatment though her husband
died subsequently but when he raised demand qua payment made
to the informant, the present false implication was raised. While
concluding argument, it is submitted that allegation of rape is not
available against petitioners and, moreover, both are of clean
antecedents.
5. Learned APP, duly assisted by learned counsel Mr.
Vishesh Kumar Singh, appearing on behalf of the informant, while
opposing the prayer of bail submitted that the allegation of
blackmailing is also available against these petitioners but could
not disputed that the allegation qua rape is available only against
co-accused Anil Giri, who is now in custody.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of fact as both petitioners prima facie implicated with
present occurrence being relative of co-accused Anil Giri, against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34639 of 2025(5) dt.20-01-2026
3/3
whom the thrust of allegation qua rape is available, accordingly,
both above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned trial Court, within a period of four
weeks of the order, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saran/concerned Court, where the
case is pending in connection with Taraiya P.S. Case No. 295 of
2024 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2)
of the BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
veena/-
U T
Checking your session…