Patna High Court
Surajmanti DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Surajmanti Devi sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a criminal case (Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.) stemming from a land dispute with the informant, Sunita Devi. The informant alleged that Surajmanti sold land that did not belong to her, while Surajmanti contended that the land was jointly owned with her husband and that the matter was essentially a civil dispute pending a title suit. The petition argued that the criminal charges were being used to exert pressure and that the petitioner was not a threat to the investigation. The Court examined the factual matrix, noted the pending title suit, and concluded that the case was more civil in nature. Consequently, the Court exercised its discretion to grant anticipatory bail, imposing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and several conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and refraining from further offences. The bail order is effective for four weeks from the date of the order, subject to compliance with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted in a case that primarily involves a civil land dispute and a pending title suit.
- Whether the petitioner is liable under the alleged criminal provisions or the allegations are merely a tool to pressure her in the civil matter.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- land dispute
- civil suit
- criminal charges
- title suit
- bail conditions
- section 319
- section 318
- section 338
- section 336
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74331 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-523 Year-2024 Thana- CIVIL LINE District- Gaya
======================================================
Surajmanti Devi W/O Kamlesh Kumar R/O Vill. - Aurma, P.S- Magadh
Medical, District- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi, Advocate
: Mr. Dheeraj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Rabindra Kumar Priyadarshi,
learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jay Ram Prasad,
learned counsel representing the informant beside Mr. Bharat
Bhushan, learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending her arrest in
connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 523 of 2024
registered for the offence under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 338,
336(3) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 01.10.2024 by the
informant, Sunita Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the lady has alleged
that this petitioner sold the land which belong to them and on
which they have complete peaceful physical possession. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74331 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
accused list in the F.I.R. beside the purchaser, also include the
petitioner’s son Gaurav Kumar S/o Kamlesh Prasad.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a
perusal of the petition would show that she has recorded her
name as Surajmanti Devi wife of Kamlesh Kumar @ Kamlesh
Prasad. She is the legally wedded of the informant’s husband.
The land belong to them, the son Gaurav Kumar has already
filed Title Suit. As her husband was not supporting her
financially, she sold the land. This is purely a civil dispute
which can very well be adjudicated in the court of law. Only
to put pressure, the present case.
5. Learned counsel for the informant opposes the
prayer submitting that the lady is not the legally wedded wife
of Kamlesh Kumar @ Kamlesh Prasad and has sold the land
which in no way belongs to her.
6. This Court has gone through the facts of the case
and the submissions put forward by the parties and the list of
accused which clearly show that one of the accused is Gaurav
Kumar, son of the present petitioner, Surajmanti Devi. The
informant herself has incorporated the father’s name as
Kamlesh Prasad who the present petitioner claims to be her
husband. Out of the 21 decimal land, two third has been sold.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74331 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
A Title Suit is pending, it will decide the fate of the land, in
that background, this Court is inclined to extend her the
privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya, in
connection with Civil Lines P.S. Case No. 523 of 2024 subject
to the following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card)
to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74331 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
(iv) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at
liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…