Patna High Court

Mithila DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 19 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions, as the allegations did not warrant denial of bail.

Summary

Mithila Devi and Santosh Sahni applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a kidnapping case (IPC §§363, 366A) where they were not named in the FIR but were mentioned in the victim's statement. They alleged false implication arising from a land dispute and asserted a clean antecedent, citing a marriage of the victim to another party. The State opposed the bail. The court examined the nature of the accusations, the lack of direct naming in the FIR, and the petitioners' claims of false implication. It held that these factors did not justify denial of bail. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 each, two sureties, and an eight‑week surrender period, subject to CrPC §482(2).

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when petitioners are not named in the FIR but are implicated through a victim's statement
Whether allegations of false implication and a clean antecedent justify granting bail in offences under IPC §§363 and 366A
Whether the seriousness of kidnapping offences precludes the grant of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164, 482(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366A

Subjects

anticipatory bail
kidnapping
false implication
land dispute
IPC
CrPC
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4341 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-159 Year-2023 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR TOWN District-
                                                       Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
           1.     Mithila Devi Son of Ram Babu Sahni Resident of Village - Madaripur Karn,
                  P.S.- Rampur Hari, District - Muzaffarpur.
           2.    Santosh Sahni Son of Ram babu Sahni Resident of Village - Madaripur
                 Karn, P.S.- Rampur Hari, District - Muzaffarpur.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Bhavesh Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   19-02-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

                   State.

                                2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for

                   the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366A of the Indian

                   Penal Code.

                                3. As per F.I.R., on 25.02.2023, daughter of informant

                   went to market but did not return. Upon search, informant came

                   to know that co-accused Jitendra Kumar and Mithun Kumar

                   along with 3-4 unknown persons kidnapped her daughter.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

                   petitioners are not named in the F.I.R. and their names

                   transpired in the statement of victim, recorded under Section
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4341 of 2026(2) dt.19-02-2026
                                                        2/2




                      164 Cr.P.C. Petitioners are gotiyas of the informant and have

                      falsely been implicated in this case due to land dispute. It is

                      further submitted that victim has solemnized marriage with

                      Jatinder Saheni on 26.05.2023 which is evident from bare

                      perusal of order dated 31.03.2025 passed in Criminal Writ

                      Petition No. 5333 of 2023 by Hon’ble High Court of Punjab and

                      Haryana at Chandigarh. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

                                   5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed

                      the bail application.

                                   6. Considering the nature of accusation and other facts

                      and circumstances of the case, this anticipatory bail is allowed

                      and it is ordered that let the above named petitioners in the event

                      of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period

                      of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing

                      bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties

                      of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial

                      Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in connection with Muzaffarpur Town

                      (Sikandarpur OP) P. S. Case No. 159 of 2023, subject to

                      condition as laid down under Section 482(2) BNSS.



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…