Patna High Court
Magiam Devi @ Mina MurmuversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court ordered provisional anticipatory bail for the petitioners, subject to bond, sureties, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioners, five women residing near Srinagar Police Station, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case involving numerous offences under the Bihar Negotiable Substances Act and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016. They contended that they were falsely implicated after merely observing a disturbance caused by a drunken individual, Solendra Murmu, and that the informant’s allegations were baseless. The State opposed the bail application. The High Court, after hearing counsel, granted provisional anticipatory bail conditioned on each petitioner furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and subject to verification of their criminal antecedents. The order stipulated that if petitioners 1‑4 are found to have any prior case or petitioner 5 has more than one prior case, the bail would not be confirmed; otherwise, it would be confirmed forthwith.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
- Whether the alleged false implication and lack of prior criminal antecedent justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Substances Act — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 121(1), 121(2), 132, 190, 192(2), 221, 3(5), 351(2), 352, 61(2)
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016 — s. 37(1)
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- women defendants
- Bihar Negotiable Substances Act
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40593 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2026 Thana- Sri Nagar District- Purnia
======================================================
1. Magiam Devi @ Mina Murmu W/o Talloo Soren R/o Village - Kali Bari
Ward no. 1, P.S - Srinagar, District - Purnea
2. Sunita Baski W/o Bittu Tuddu R/o Village - Kali Bari Ward No. 1, P.S -
Srinagar, District - Purnea
3. Fulmani Tuddu W/o Late Manju Murmu R/o Village - Kali Bari Ward No. 1,
P.S - Srinagar, District - Purnea
4. Sunita Tuddu @ Sunita Devi W/o Manoj Tuddu R/o Village - Kali Bari
Ward No. 1, P.S - Srinagar, District - Purnea
5. Talamay Soren W/o Late Bhola Tuddu @ Bhola Soren R/o Village - Kali
Bari Ward No. 1, P.S - Srinagar, District - Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Prawesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-06-2026 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 192(2),
190, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 109, 221, 121(1), 121(2), 61(2),
132, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS as well as Section 37(1)
of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act, 2016.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners no. 1 to 4 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner no. 5 has antecedent of one case under the Excise Act
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40593 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
2/3
and all the petitioners are women and in sum and substance, the
allegation is that one Solendra Murmu was brought to Srinagar
Police Station as he was found in a drunken state when the mob
gathered near the police station and freed Solendra Murmu.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant based on the disclosure made by the Chaukidar. It
is further submitted that petitioners are resident of a place near
to the police station, as such, out of inquisitiveness, they had
also gone to see the ruckus which was being created and came
to be implicated.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, let the
petitioners, above-named, in the event of their arrest or
surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released
on provisional 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 the learned Trial
Court where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection
with Srinagar P.S. Case No. 25 of 2026, subject to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40593 of 2026(2) dt.24-06-2026
3/3
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that thereafter the learned
Trial Court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners
and if it is found that petitioners no. 1 to 4 have antecedent of
even one case and petitioner no. 5 has antecedent of more than
one case, it would be presumed that petitioners had concealed
their antecedent before this Court, at para 3 of the anticipatory
bail application, in that event, the provisional anticipatory bail
order shall not be confirmed, but, if it is found on verification
that petitioners no. 1 to 4 are persons with clean antecedent and
petitioner no. 5 has antecedent of only one case, in that event,
the provisional anticipatory bail order shall be confirmed
forthwith.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.