Patna High Court
Kulwanti DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail subject to the conditions imposed by the Court.
Summary
Kulwanti Devi was accused in a FIR for allegedly obtaining benefits under the Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana – Gramin by falsely claiming she owned no pucca house, despite possessing two, and for misappropriating Rs. 90,000 of government funds. The petition sought anticipatory bail, asserting she had no involvement in any forgery, that the houses were built in compliance with the scheme, and that she had a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail, relying on the FIR and charges under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 316(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act. The High Court, after noting the lack of substantive evidence and the petitioner’s clean record, held that she was entitled to pre‑arrest bail. The Court directed the District Court to release her on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of any other pending cases.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations under Sections 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 316(2) of the Bihar Negotiable Securities Act.
- Whether the absence of evidence and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify the grant of pre‑arrest bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 316(2), 318(4), 336(3), 338
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- fraud
- PMAY-Gramin
- false declaration
- misappropriation of government funds
- clean antecedent
- Section 318
- Section 338
- Section 336
- Section 316
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4384 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-420 Year-2025 Thana- DINARA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Kulwanti Devi W/o- Late Sriman Narayan Singh Village- Mirzapur PS-
Dinara District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Singh, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar,
learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection
with Dinara P.S. Case No. 420 of 2025 registered under Sections
318(4),338,336(3),316(2), of BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, during the
financial year 2021–22, the petitioner allegedly obtained
benefits under Pradhan Mantri Awaas Yojana – Gramin (PMAY-
Gramin) by falsely declaring that she owned no pucca house,
despite already having two such houses, and received Rs.
90,000/-, despite recovery notices and orders in Second Appeal
No.168 of 2024, she has failed to refund the said amount.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4384 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and she has
falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner has
not committed any forgery in relation to the Government funds.
The measurement book reveals that the petitioner constructed
the house strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions of
the Indira Awas Yojna, and after due verification, a completion
report was also submitted by the executive agency. The
allegation that the petitioner constructed the house in an illegal
manner and misappropriated a sum of Rs. 90,000/- of
Government funds is not supported by any evidence. It is further
submitted that the petitioner’s son constructed his own house on
a separate piece of land. The petitioner has clean antecedent. On
these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest
bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on
behalf of the parties, as well, having perused the allegation
made in the FIR and the fact that misappropriation of sum of
Rs. 90,000/- of Government funds is not supported by any
evidence, I am of the opinion that the petitioner, having clean
antecedent, has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4384 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
pre-arrest bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending/
in connection with Dinara P.S. Case No. 420 of 2025, subject to
the condition as laid down under Section 482 of the
BNSS//438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…