Patna High Court

Leela Devi @ Leela KumariversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

In the absence of direct evidence and given the petitioner’s clean antecedents, the court held that anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. is warranted.

Summary

Leela Devi, the grandmother of a deceased victim, feared arrest in a case involving alleged kidnapping and murder under Sections 140(1), 103(1), 238 and 61(2) of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s case was based largely on information from a single informant, Pramod Kumar, and did not include any direct eyewitness testimony. The recovered kidnap victim, Dhiraj Kumar, did not name the petitioner as a participant. The petitioner asserted her innocence, highlighted her clean antecedents, and argued that the allegations were of a general and omnibus nature. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s spotless record, and the broad nature of the accusations, allowed anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., directing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to arrest within eight weeks.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations under Sections 140(1), 103(1), 238 and 61(2) of the B.N.S.
Whether the material on record justifies denial of bail.

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 140(1), 238, 482(2), 61(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
kidnapping
murder
Section 482
clean antecedents
bail bond
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7381 of 2026
                        Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2025 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Leela Devi @ Leela Kumari W/o- Sahja Prasad @ Sahjanand Pd. R/v- Chhati
                 Ps- Dhanarua Dist- Patna

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :        Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate
                                                  Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-03-2026                    Heard Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, learned senior counsel

                   appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Umeshanand

                   Pandit, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                  2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 140(1),

                   103(1), 238 and 61(2) of the B.N.S..

                                  3. As per prosecution case, on 11.09.2025, informant

                   got to know that all the F.I.R. named accused persons, including

                   this petitioner and some unknown persons, took away Subodh

                   Kumar, Dhiraj Kumar, Lovely Kumari and Sudhanshu Kumar.

                   On 12.09.2025, dead body of informant’s son, namely Subodh

                   Kumar and Lovely Kumari was found near the railway track.

                                  4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7381 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
                                            2/3




          behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has

          committed no offence. Informant is not an eye witness to the

          occurrence and petitioner has falsely been implicated in this

          case merely on the basis of information given by one Pramod

          Kumar. During investigation, Dhiraj Kumar, who was also

          alleged to have been kidnapped by the accused persons, was

          recovered and in his statement, he has not named this petitioner

          as one of the kidnapper. Moreover, petitioner is none else than

          grandmother of deceased Lovely Kumari. Petitioner is a lady

          and claims clean antecedents.

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

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner.

                        6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, general and omnibus nature of accusation, materials that

          have surfaced during investigation and clean antecedents of the

          petitioner, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioner is allowed.

                        7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

          a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

          petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7381 of 2026(3) dt.16-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Masaurhi, Patna in

                       connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 279 of 2025, subject to

                       condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…