Patna High Court

Maya DeviversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 4 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, directing her release on bond with sureties.

Summary

Maya Devi was arrested in connection with a case where 22 persons allegedly assaulted an informant's family and stole a gold chain and Rs.1 lakh. She applied for regular bail, asserting she had no specific allegation against her, no criminal antecedent, and was merely a member of the mob. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences listed under the B.N.S. The Court, after hearing both sides, noted the need to segregate allegations and found no specific overt act attributed to her. Consequently, the Court granted her regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. The judgment also criticized lower courts for not distinguishing between accused with specific charges and those without.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner, being a member of the alleged mob but without specific allegations, is eligible for regular bail.
Whether the lack of criminal antecedent and absence of specific overt act against the petitioner warrant bail.
Whether the seriousness of the offences listed under the B.N.S. precludes granting bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 324(2), 329(4), 351(2), 351(3), 352

Subjects

bail
regular bail
criminal procedure
segregation of allegations
mob participation
criminal antecedent
Bihar

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5080 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-125 Year-2025 Thana- CHAUTHAM District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Maya Devi W/O Rambahadur Paswan R/O Village-Nauranga, P.S.-
                 Chautham, Distt.- Khagaria

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anish Chandra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   04-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 191(2),

                   191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 329(4), 324(2), 303(2),

                   352, 351(2) and 351(3) of B.N.S.

                                3. The case of the prosecution is that altogether 22

                   persons have assaulted the family members of the informant and

                   have snatched golden chain and one lac rupees.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned

                   counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is specific

                   allegation against Rikesh, Chhotu, Gautam and Anil. As far as

                   petitioner is concerned, there is no any specific overt act against
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5080 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                            2/3




          this petitioner. She is only the member of mob. A statement has

          been made in para-3 of this petition that the petitioner has got no

          criminal antecedent. Moreover, she is languishing in judicial

          custody since 27.11.2025.

                       5. Learned APP appearing for the State has

          vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is

          inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

          petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with

          Chautham P.S. Case No. 125 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

          Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

          each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

          Khagaria.

                       7. Before parting, it is very disheartening to note

          that even the officers in the cadre of ADJ are not able to

          segregate the allegations and are simply rejecting the bail

          application only on the ground that one or two persons have

          received injury. The duty of the learned trial court while

          passing order on bail petition is to segregate and appreciate

          the allegations. Those persons who are only named and they

          have no allegation of any overt act, their case must not be
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5080 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      treated on similar footing as of those who are having specific

                      allegations.



                                             (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…