Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Puja DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a cash bond, a demand draft to the informant, and specific conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.

Summary

Puja Devi was arrested in connection with a FIR alleging that she and her husband misused an informant's documents to obtain a loan of Rs.1,05,191 and threatened the informant's life, invoking sections 319(2), 318(4), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. The petitioner pleaded innocence, claiming the allegations were fabricated, and offered to repay the loan amount to the informant. The Additional Public Prosecutor raised no objection to the bail application. The Court, applying Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ordered that the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and a demand draft of Rs.1,05,191 to the informant, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence. The bail order also directed verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedents and stipulated cancellation of bail for non‑compliance. The order effectively disposed of the petition by granting bail with the stipulated conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438(2) of the CrPC despite the serious nature of the allegations under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023.
  • Whether the petitioner’s willingness to pay the alleged loan amount influences the bail decision.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • Section 438 CrPC
  • Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
  • false implication
  • loan fraud
  • threat to kill
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38749 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1136 Year-2025 Thana- NAGAR District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Puja Devi W/o Chandan Kumar R/o Village - Kahar Toli behind Sadar
                 Hospital, P.S. - Sadar Hajipur, Dist. Vaishali.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Kaushal Kishor, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   03-07-2026                    Heard Mr. Kaushal Kishor, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned Additional

                   Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in

                   connection with Hajipur Town P.S. Case No. 1136 of 2025,

                   F.I.R. dated 16.09.2025 for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 319(2), 318(4), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

                               3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along

                   with her husband have misused the documents of the informant

                   and took a loan of Rs. 1,05,191/- in her name and also

                   threatened to kill her.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and she has falsely been implicated in the

                   present case. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38749 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                            2/3




          fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as

          alleged in the FIR.

                      5. Learned counsel for the petitioner on instruction

          fairly submits that the petitioner is ready to pay Rs. 1,05,191/- to

          the informant.

                      6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has no

          objection in this regard.

                       7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          let the petitioner, above named, in the event of her arrest or

          surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days

          from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two

          sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

          CJM, Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Hajipur Town P.S.

          Case No. 1136 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down

          under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and

          with other following conditions:-

                       i. Petitioner shall furnish a demand draft of Rs.

          1,05,191/- (Rs. One lakh five thousand one hundred and ninety

          one) in favour of the informant, namely, Pinki Devi and the

          same shall be deposited at the time of furnishing bail bond and

          the learned Court below is directed to hand over the said
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38749 of 2026(2) dt.03-07-2026
                                                        3/3




                      demand draft to the informant or her representative.

                                   ii. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                      properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

                      and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                      on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                      reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                   iii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                      witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                      move for cancellation of bail.

                                   iv. And further condition that the court below shall

                      verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                      any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed her

                      criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                      cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                      acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                      shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                      verification.



                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.