Patna High Court
Manju DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The court held that, on a prima facie basis, the petitioners are entitled to pre‑arrest bail.
Summary
The petitioners, a family of co‑sharers, were implicated in a FIR alleging assault, attempted murder, and other offences against an informant and her mother, allegedly to seize land. They applied for pre‑arrest bail, claiming innocence, lack of material evidence, and that the allegations of injury, property damage, and miscarriage were uncorroborated. The State opposed the bail. The court examined the FIR and found the mother’s injury to be simple, the informant’s injury unverified, and the allegations of property damage and miscarriage likely false, noting a possible land‑grab motive. Concluding that the petitioners had made out a prima facie case for bail, the court ordered their release on pre‑arrest bail with a bond and sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the CrPC and verification of criminal antecedents. The district court was directed to verify any pending cases, after which the bail order would lapse if such cases exist.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite the serious nature of the offences alleged in the FIR
- Whether the allegations of injury, property damage, and miscarriage are sufficiently corroborated to deny bail
- Whether the land‑dispute motive affects the bail consideration
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Statutes (BNS) — s. 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 324(2), 3(5), 351(2), 88
- Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- assault
- land dispute
- false allegations
- Section 482 CrPC
- Bihar Penal provisions
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5226 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-624 Year-2025 Thana- SIWAN MUFFASIL District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Manju Devi, Female, aged about 45 years, wife of Rama Shanker Sah.
2. Rama Shanker Sah, Male, aged about 50 years, son of Late Ram Pravesh
Sah
3. Ankur Kumar, Male, aged about 25 years.
4. Ankit Kumar, Male, aged about 21 years.
5. Dudh Nath Sah @ Bulet @ Dudhnath Kumar, Male, aged about 21 years.
All 3 to 5 sons of Rama Shanker Sah and all Resident of Village-Barhan
Gopal, P.S.- Siwan Muffasil, District- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raghav Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. Raghav Prasad, learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection
with Siwan Muffasil P.S. Case No. 624 of 2025, registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2),
324(2), 88, 303(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioners
along with other accused persons, had assaulted the informant
and her mother causing injury, with an intention to kill.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5226 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
falsely been implicated in the present case. The injury sustained
by the mother of the informant has been found to be simple in
nature while the injury which has been sustained by the
informant, the opinion of the doctor is reserved. He further
submitted that the story of damaging windows of the house of
the informant and snatching of ornaments is false and
concocted. He further submitted that the parties are co-sharers
(pattidar), and just to grab the land of the petitioners, the
informant has dragged the petitioners in the present case. In
absence of material evidence collected in course of
investigation, the petitioners deserve 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 heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in
the FIR, I find that the injury sustained by the mother of the
informant has been found to be simple in nature while the injury
which has been sustained by the informant, the opinion of the
doctor is reserved and the allegation of causing miscarriage to
the informant cannot be corroborated. The allegation of
damaging the windows of the house of the informant and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5226 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
snatching of ornaments appears to be false and concocted. The
parties are co-sharers (pattidar), and just to grab the land of the
petitioners, the informant has dragged the petitioners in the
present case. I am of the opinion that petitioners have, prima
facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court
where the case is pending, in connection with Siwan Muffasil
P.S. Case No. 624 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioners as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioners as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.