Patna High Court
Suman DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted as the allegations pertain to a civil dispute and the investigating agency found no criminality, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Suman Devi and Baijanti Devi, were named in a complaint alleging multiple IPC offences arising from a land sale dispute. They contended that the dispute was civil, they have clean antecedents, and the police investigation concluded no criminality. Despite the trial court taking cognizance on a protest petition, the petitioners sought anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC. The State opposed the bail. The court, after hearing both sides, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions prescribed under Section 438(2). The decision emphasized that where the investigation finds no criminal act and the matter is essentially civil, anticipatory bail may be appropriate.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the investigating agency finds no criminality but cognizance is taken on a protest petition.
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent and gender are relevant factors for granting anticipatory bail.
- The relevance of the civil nature of the underlying dispute to the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 323, 341, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- section 438
- civil dispute
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
- gender considerations
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37068 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3083 Year-2022 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE District-
Saran
======================================================
1. Suman Devi Wife of Raj Kumar Singh Resident of Mohalla - Rajiv Nagar,
Road No. 23, P.S.- Rajiv Nagar, District - Patna.
2. Baijanti Devi Wife of Vidya Rai Resident of Mohalla - Nayagaon
(Mahuaatar), P.S.- Nayagaon, District - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467,
468, 471, 120(B), 323, 341, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and are women
and in sum and substance the informant alleges that the land
belonging to her was sold by the petitioner no.2. It is next
submitted that police after threadbare investigation came to a
considered conclusion that dispute was civil in nature and no
criminality was involved, as such submitted final form but based
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37068 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/2
on protest petition filed by the complainant, the learned trial
court took cognizance. It is thus submitted that when one
investigating agency after threadbare investigation came to a
considered conclusion that petitioners are innocent, whether it
would be prudent for the court to send the petitioners to jail
based on an order of cognizance, which came to be taken, based
on a protest petition.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the
petitioners above-named, in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned trial court where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with Complaint
Case No.3083 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.